C L O S E T H E G A P / City of Asheville, NC Greenway Plan ADA Transition Plan Pedestrian Plan
September 2022
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
D E D I C AT I O N The GAP plans would not have happened without the commitment of these two women who dedicated their careers to improving the quality of life for the most vulnerable users of our transportation system and all the rest of us who live in Asheville.
Barb Mee Barb was the beloved bike and pedestrian planner for the City of Asheville since 2005. Kind and caring, Barb was a great listener and thoughtful communicator. She is famous for her ability to explain complex transportation issues with humorous analogies that any person could understand. Barb shepherded the many departments in the organization of the City of Asheville towards their best management practices for accessibility. Barb valued people’s opinions and was passionate about public engagement. Despite Barb’s gentle approach, she was a tireless and tenacious advocate for biking, walking, and accessibility.
Janet Barlow Janet was the founder and President of the research and consulting firm, Accessible Design for the Blind. We were fortunate to have someone considered a national expert on best accessibility practices for people with low vision and the blind living with us here in Asheville. Her work enlightened so many professionals and advocates on the importance of accessible urban design. As a local advocate, Janet dedicated countless volunteer hours to the City of Asheville to improve our bicycle, pedestrian, and greenway facilities. Additionally, Janet was a key player in the efforts to acquire the lands that make up what is now the Hominy Creek Greenway and continued to steward the trail with her neighborhood community. Without Janet, Hominy Creek Greenway may not exist today. Both women leave a lasting legacy in their professional fields, and we will be forever grateful for their contributions to Asheville. They will be missed. By Claudia Nix, Terri March, and Lucy Crown
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
TA B L E O F C O N T E N T S 1 THE VISION ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������1
Targeted Work Sessions ����������������������������������������������������������������������47
Introduction ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������3
City Task Force & Commission Presentations �������������47
Close the GAP �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������3
Community Surveys ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������47
Vision ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 3
Broad Community Feedback Survey ������������������������������������������47
The Results ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 4
Intercept Surveys ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 51
Greenway Plan (G) ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 6
Project Network Survey �����������������������������������������������������������������������52
ADA Transition Plan (A) �������������������������������������������������������������������������7 Pedestrian Plan (P) ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������7 Connecting to the Vision ���������������������������������������������������������������������� 9 Equity Statement �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 10
Policy Framework at a Glance ��������������������������������������������������������12 Vision �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������12 Goals ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������12 Recommended Actions �������������������������������������������������������������������������13
2 WHERE WE ARE TODAY �������������������������������������������� 17 Community Overview ����������������������������������������������������������������������������� 19 Demographics �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 19 Jobs and Housing ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������24
Network Overview ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������24
Final Community Opinion Survey �������������������������������������������������52
Public Meetings ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 54 Photo & Video Campaign ����������������������������������������������������������������� 54 Additional Engagement Strategies ����������������������������������������� 54
4 HOW WE GOT HERE ����������������������������������������������������� 55 The Birth of a Project �����������������������������������������������������������������������������57 Corridor Approach ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 58 Destination + Equity Score �������������������������������������������������������������� 58 Connectivity Score ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������62 Safety Score ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 64 Results ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 66
Project Categories Plan Identification �������������������������������� 68 Assign to a Primary Plan ������������������������������������������������������������������� 68
Transportation Network �����������������������������������������������������������������������26
How it All Comes Together �������������������������������������������������������������� 68
Greenway Network ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������26
Network Confirmation ������������������������������������������������������������������������ 68
Pedestrian Network ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������28
Project Development & Recommendations ����������������������� 69
Other Network Considerations ������������������������������������������������������ 30
What you need to know about roadway maintenance and funding requirements ����������������������������������������������������������������� 72
Current Walking Rates ���������������������������������������������������������������������������35 Strava ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������35
5 GREENWAY (G) PLAN AND RESULTS �������75
U.S. Census ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������35
Overview �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 77
Short-Duration Pedestrian Counts ����������������������������������������������36
Step 1: Refine Previously Planned Greenway Alignments �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 77
Long-Duration Pedestrian Counts ���������������������������������������������� 38 Relevant Local, Regional and State Plans ����������������������������� 38
Reviewing the 2013 Greenway Master Plan For Feasibility ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 77
3 THE COMMUNITY VOICE ��������������������������������������� 41
Step 2: Identify New Greenway Corridors �������������������������78
A Note About COVID-19 ����������������������������������������������������������������������43
Step 3: Define and Assign New Typologies (Types) ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 80
Core Engagement Strategy ��������������������������������������������������������������43 Think Tank Team (TTT) �������������������������������������������������������������������������45
Network Recommendations and Prioritization ����������� 88
Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) ������������������������������������������45
Network Recommendations ������������������������������������������������������������ 88
ADA Focus Group �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������45
More on Project Development Next Steps: ������������������������ 88
Asheville Unpaved Alliance ���������������������������������������������������������������45
Next Steps to the Neighborhood Greenway Program ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 96
6 THE ADA TRANSITION PLAN (A) SUMMARY �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������129
Develop a Neighborhood Greenway Plan and Signage Guide �������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 96
What is the ADA Transition Plan For the Public Rights-of-Way? ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������131
Neighborhood Greenway Pilot Recommendations � 96 Step 4: The Prioritization Process and Results ��������100 Factors Determining Project Priorities ����������������������������������100 Public Input Summary �����������������������������������������������������������������������100
Top 10 Priority Greenway Projects for the City of Asheville ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������102 1 / Swannanoa Greenway (Greenway Spine) ����������������������102 2 / Beaucatcher Greenway (Arterial Greenway) ���������������102 3 / Reed Creek Greenway (Arterial Greenway) �����������������102 4 / French Broad River Greenway North (NRADTIP) (Greenway Spine) �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������102 5 / Hominy Creek Greenway East (Greenway Spine) �� 103 6 / West Asheville Rail-with-Trail Greenway and Deaverview Connector (Greenway Spine) ��������������������������� 103 7 / Hendersonville Road Multi-use Path and Jake Rusher Greenway (Arterial Greenways) �������������������������������� 103
The ADA Self-Evaluation �������������������������������������������������������������������133 Review of Policies and Practices ������������������������������������������������133 Review Infrastructure Needs ���������������������������������������������������������133 Methodology and Approach ����������������������������������������������������������134 The Corridor Approach ���������������������������������������������������������������������134
More about the ADA ����������������������������������������������������������������������������136 The ADA and its Relationship to Other Laws ���������������136 What are the Proposed Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG)? ���������������������������������������136
ADA Transition Plan Project Development Process ��������������������������������������������������������������������������137 Step 1: Corridor Prioritization - Round 1 �������������������������������� 137 Step 2: Corridor Prioritization - Round 2 (Public Feedback) ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 137 Step 3: Final Project Lists by Category ���������������������������������� 137
8 / Rhododendron Creek Greenway (Arterial Greenway) ������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 103
Step 4. Project Development & Recommendations ����138
9 / South Asheville Rail-with-Trail/Sweeten Creek Road Greenway (Spine and Arterial Greenways) ������������������������� 103
Detailed Assessments During Corridor Implementation ����������������������������������������������������������������142
Step 5. Public Input Round 3 ��������������������������������������������������������138
10 / Smith Mill Creek Greenway (Arterial Greenway) ������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 103
NCDOT Greenway (Multi-use Paths) Projects Prioritization ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 105
7 THE PEDESTRIAN PLAN (P) RESULTS �� 151
NCDOT Projects and Corridor Studies that Include Greenway Elements ����������������������������������������������������������������������������� 105
Step 1: Corridor Prioritization - Round 1 ��������������������������������153
Swannanoa River Greenway ��������������������������������������������������������� 108 Beaucatcher Greenway ����������������������������������������������������������������������� 110
Project Identification �������������������������������������������������������������������������153 Step 2: Corridor Prioritization - Round 2 (Public Feedback) ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������153 Step 3: Final Project Lists by Category ����������������������������������154
Reed Creek Greenway ��������������������������������������������������������������������������112
Step 4: Project Development & Recommendations ����154
French Broad Greenway (North RADTIP) ������������������������� 114
Step 5: Public Input Round 3 ��������������������������������������������������������155
Hominy Creek Greenway ������������������������������������������������������������������� 116
More on Pedestrian Facility Selection ������������������������������� 164
West Asheville Rail-with-Trail & Deaverview Connector �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 118
Competing Needs and Complete Streets Resources � 164
West Asheville Rail-with-Trail & Deaverview Connector ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������120
Roadway Crossing Treatment Selection ��������������������������� 168
Resources for Complete Streets �������������������������������������������������165
Rhododendron Creek Greenway �����������������������������������������������122
Guides for Improvement Pedestrian Safety at Uncontrolled Crossing Locations ���������������������������������������������� 168
South Asheville Rail-with-Trail & Sweeten Creek Road ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������124
Project Elements for People Walking ����������������������������������� 172
Smith Mill Creek Greenway ������������������������������������������������������������126
Traffic Calming ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 172 Decorative Crosswalks ����������������������������������������������������������������������� 172 Access to Transit ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 173
Accessibility for All ������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 173
8 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT & NEXT STEPS ������������������������������������������������������������������������ 177 Beyond Preliminary Planning �������������������������������������������������������179 Fine Tuning the Process �������������������������������������������������������������������181 What to Expect �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������183 Project Development When NCDOT or Federal Funds are Involved ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 184
9 DESIGN & POLICY ��������������������������������������������������������187 Introduction ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������189 Design Standards & Policy Review Tasks ������������������������189 Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Findings and Recommendations ������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 190 Asheville Standards Specifications and Details Manual (ASSDM) Findings and Recommendations ������������������������ 190 Targeted Focus Group Meeting Findings and Recommendations �������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 191 Special Focus Areas ���������������������������������������������������������������������������� 191 Questions for Each Category �������������������������������������������������������� 191 Categories ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 191 External Policy and NCDOT Coordination Findings ������195 Other Resources and Design Standards �������������������������������197
10 TAKE ACTION ������������������������������������������������������������������ 199 Organizational & Partner Framework �����������������������������������201 Asheville City Council �������������������������������������������������������������������������201 City Staff �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������201 French Broad River MPO ������������������������������������������������������������������201 Buncombe County & Neighboring Jurisdictions �������������201 NCDOT Division 13 �������������������������������������������������������������������������������202 NCDOT Integrated Mobility Division ���������������������������������������202 Developers �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������202 Non-Profit Partners �����������������������������������������������������������������������������202 Community Members �������������������������������������������������������������������������202
The Action Plan �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������202
APPENDICES ���������������������������������������������������������������������������� 223
I N D E X O F F IG U R E S , I M AG E S , M A P S & TA B L E S FIGURES Figure 1. Not All People Can (or Want to) Drive. ������������� 10 Figure 2. Asheville Population by Gender and Age. �����21 Figure 3. Types of Disabilities in the City of Asheville. �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������22 Figure 4. Combining Housing and Vehicle Cost, We Begin to Understand the True Cost of Living in Asheville. ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������23 Figure 5. Analysis of Where People are Starting Their Work Commute Trips. ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������24 Figure 6. The Lifecycle of a Pedestrian and Bicycle Project. �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������26 Figure 7. How Sidewalks and Crossings Get Built. ������28 Figure 8. Previous City of Asheville Planning Documents Reviewed for Close the GAP. ��������������������������������39 Figure 9. General Gap Survey Results ������������������������������������� 48 Figure 10. ADA Survey Results �������������������������������������������������������� 50 Figure 11. Project Network Survey Demographics Summary. �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������52 Figure 12. Additional Engagement Strategies Including StoryMaps, Online Surveys, and Social Media Promotional Materials. ������������������������������������������������������������ 54
Figure 21. A Portion of the Soon to be Constructed Swannanoa River Greenway . �������������������������������������������������������������102 Figure 22. Components of Complete Streets. ��������������� 164 Figure 23. Complete Streets Project Evaluation Methodology Process. �������������������������������������������������������������������������������166 Figure 24. Facility Selection Matrix ������������������������������������������167 Figure 25. Steps Involved for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������169 Figure 26. Standard Contingency Methodology ������������181 Figure 27. How to Get Roads Built �������������������������������������������� 184 Figure 28. NCDOT Transportation Planning Process ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 185
IMAGES Image 1 / Neighborhood Greenway Showing a Small Roundabout and Facilities that Prioritize Bicyclists and Pedestrians. ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 6 Image 2 / Traditional Greenway in Asheville.
�������������������� 6
Image 3 / Eugene, OR Neighborhood Greenway Signage. ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 6
Figure 13. The Following Three Factors Guided the Creation of Projects for Close the Gap. ������������������������������������57
Image 4 / Navigating Our City with a Wheelchair is a Challenge. �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������7
Figure 14. The Five Categories of Pedestrian Connectivity: Primary Spine, Secondary Spine, Major Collector, Minor Collector and Local/Neighborhood Connections. ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������62
Image 5 / Example of a Missing Curb Ramp. ����������������������7
Figure 15. The Tiers of Projects as Defined by Combined Scores. ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 66 Figure 16. Transportation Planning Process: Predesign Steps for State and Federally Funded Projects. ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 72
Figure 17. Asheville’s New Greenway Types, Including Spine Greenways, Arterial Greenways, Neighborhood Greenways and Natural Surface Trails. �������������������������������������� 81 Figure 18. Greenway Spine Typology �����������������������������������������83 Figure 19. Arterial Spine Typology ���������������������������������������������� 85 Figure 20. Next Steps Project Development Definitions Referenced in Tables 8-11. �������������������������������������� 88
Image 6 / Curb Ramp and a Crosswalk. ������������������������������������7 Image 7 / Worn Pathways, or Goat Trails, Indicate Where Sidewalks May be Needed. �������������������������������������������������� 8 Image 8 / Constructing New Sidewalks is More than just a Sidewalk - Wood Avenue. Required a New Retaining Wall. ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 8 Image 9 / New Sidewalk Constructed through a New Development Project. ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 8 Image 10 / Where the French Broad River West Greenway meets a sidewalk, bicycle facility, a bus stop and a street is a great example of a multimodal network. ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������25 Image 11 / The First Meeting of the Think Tank Team in December 2019. �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������45 Image 12 / The First Meeting of the Community Advisory Committee in January 2020. ��������������������������������������45
Image 13 / Chalk Art Advertising the Greenway Intercept Survey in the River Arts District. ���������������������������� 51 Image 14 / Linda Glitz with Connect Buncombe Interviewing a Woman in the River Arts District. ������������ 51 Image 15 / Based on Connectivity Scoring, Hendersonville Road Has a Higher Connectivity Score (5) than Joyner Street (3). �����������������������������������������������������������������������62 Image 16 / Based on Criteria and Rating Methodology, Murdock Ave in North Asheville Had the Lowest Safety Score (1) While Patton Ave Had the Highest Possible Safety Score (7). ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 64 Image 17 / Recommendations for Brevard Road in West Asheville Include ADA Upgrades to the Existing Sidewalk and a New Sidewalk on the Other Side of the Street. ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 68 Image 18 / Hendersonville Road Corridor Study Rendering Showing a Planned Multi-use Sidepath With the Existing Sidewalk on the Other Side of the Street. ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 68 Image 19 / The French Broad Greenway Near New Belgium Brewing is an Example of a Spine Greenway (see Defining New Typologies, Image by Equinox). ������78 Image 20 / Street Redesign is a Component of Implementing Neighborhood Greenways. ����������������������������97 Image 21 / Proposed West Asheville Greenway as part of I-26 Connector Project. ����������������������������������������������������������������� 105
Image 30 / Example of Steep Driveway Cross Slope on Tunnel Road. Anything Over 2% is Non-compliant and can be a Barrier for Travel. ������������������������������������������������������ 140 Image 31 / Roundabout Crossings are Challenging for Those with Vision Impairments; Treatments such as Signals and Flashing Beacons with Audible Messages can Help. �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 140 Image 32 / Example of Temporary Ramp used to Maintain Access through a Temporary Work Zone. ���������������������������������������������������������������������������� 141 Image 33 / Example of Utility Poles and Other Obstacles in PAR Merrimon Avenue. ������������������������������������������ 141 Image 34 / Example of a Sidewalk in Poor Repair that Creates and Obstacle. ����������������������������������������������� 141 Image 35 / Example of Curb Ramp on Charlotte Street in Need of Better Drainage. ��������������������������������������������� 141 Image 36 / Signs in the Sidewalk Create an Obstacle on Merrimon Avenue. ������������������������������������������������������ 141 Image 37 / Vertical Clearance Requirements Ensure Visually Impaired Pedestrians can Navigate without Injury. ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 141 Image 38 / Curb Ramp Elements �������������������������������������������������142 Image 39 / Watauga Street in Montford is an Example of a Sidewalk with an ADA Condition Rating of 5 - In Poor Condition. ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������142
Image 22 / Hendersonville Road Proposed Multi-use Path (After) south of Long Shoals Road Entering the City of Asheville. ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 106
Image 40 / The City Maintains Most Streets in Downtown Asheville like Haywood Street and Battery Park Avenue. ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������153
Image 23 / A Person with a Vision Impairment Trying to Navigate the Public Right-of-Way. ������������������������������������������131
Image 41 / A Pedestrian Crossing at a Location with a Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) ����������������������155
Image 24 / Examples of Public Right-of-Way Include Streets, Sidewalks, Crossings, Pedestrian Signals and Bus Stops, Among Others. ��������������������������������������������������������������������133
Image 42 / Some of Asheville’s Busiest Corridors, like Tunnel Road, have a Myriad of Overlapping Land Use, Safety and Transportation Needs that Require a Detailed Study. �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������155
Image 25 / A Common Practice for Reviewing Infrastructure for ADA Compliance is a Detailed Inventory of Slope and Dimension of the Right-of-Way. ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������134 Image 26 / People with Disabilities Navigating Asheville’s Public Right-of-Way. ������������������������������������������������������135 Image 27 / Art Installation Celebrating the 25th Anniversary of the ADA Law ��������������������������������������������������������������136 Image 28 / Audible Push Buttons that are Properly Positioned are Essential for Individuals with Disabilities to be able to Cross Busy Streets. ���������������� 140 Image 29 / Example of Preferred Curb Ramp Configuration for Individuals in Wheelchairs and with Vision Impairments. ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 140
Image 43 / Recently Upgraded Transit Stop on Tunnel Road That Needs Additional Crossing Treatments. ���� 173 Image 44 / Unimproved Bus Stop on Tunnel Road Which is One of the Most Heavily Used Transit Corridors in the City. ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������173 Image 45 / These Guidelines Propose Accessibility Guidance for the Design, Construction and Alteration of Pedestrian Facilities in the Public Right-of-Way ���� 174 Image 46 / Staff at Work on Sidewalk Upgrades in Asheville. ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������179 Image 47 / A Sample Image and Table from Asheville’s Standards and Design Manual. ����������������������� 190 Image 48 / Temporary Traffic Control while RADTIP was Under Development �������������������������������������������������������������������������196
MAPS
TABLES
Map 1. Close the GAP Proposed Network ����������������������������� 5
Table 1. Total Crashes in North Carolina and Asheville, 2014-2019 ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������35
Map 2. Asheville is in the heart of Buncombe County, in Western North Carolina. �������������������������������������������������������������������� 20 Map 3. Existing Greenways and Sidewalks in the City of Asheville. ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 27 Map 4. Multimodal Corridor Studies ����������������������������������������31 Map 5. Reported Pedestrian-Involved Crashes in the City of Asheville �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������34 Map 6. City Collected Pedestrian Counts �������������������������37 Map 7. Streets Mentioned in Close the GAP Surveys ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 49 Map 8. Legacy Neighborhoods �����������������������������������������������������53 Map 9. Equity Score ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������59 Map 10. Destination Score ��������������������������������������������������������������� 60 Map 11. Destination and Equity ������������������������������������������������������61 Map 12. Connectivity Score ���������������������������������������������������������������63 Map 13. Safety Score �������������������������������������������������������������������������������65 Map 14. Total Score by Tier Groups ������������������������������������������67 Map 15. Combined Greenway Network Map ������������������� 89 Map 16. Greenway Spines Map ���������������������������������������������������� 90 Map 17. Arterial Greenways Map �������������������������������������������������92 Map 18. Neighborhood Greenways Map ������������������������������94
Table 2. The Share of the Asheville Population (Percentage) that Walks to Work ������������������������������������������������������35 Table 3. Number of People Walking (5:00-7:00 p.m.) and Percent Change in Various Areas of Asheville, 2014-2019 ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������36 Table 4. Weekly Number of People Walking in Downtown and West Asheville, 2014-2015 ����������������������������38 Table 5. Typology Details - Greenway ����������������������������������������82 Table 6. Typology Details - Arterial Greenways �������������� 84 Table 7. Typology Details - Neighborhood Greenways ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 86 Table 8. City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Spine Greenways ������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 91 Table 9. City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Arterial Greenways ��������������������������������������������������������������������������93 Table 10. City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Neighborhood Greenways ��������������������������������������������������������95 Table 11. City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Neighborhood Greenway Pilot Projects �������������������� 99 Table 12. Public Input Results and Comments (Arterial Neighborhood Greenways Below are Listed in Order of Public Rankings) ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 101
Map 19. Neighborhood Greenways Pilot Project Map ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 98
Table 13. NCDOT: Priority ADA Project Groups 1 - 9 �145
Map 20. Top Greenway Projects Map ���������������������������������� 104
Table 15. NCDOT: Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1 - 9 ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������159
Map 21. NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Projects ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������107
Table 14. COA: Priority ADA Project Groups 1 - 5 ��������149
Map 22. Public Input Score ������������������������������������������������������������139
Table 16. COA: Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1 - 4 ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������163
Map 23. NCDOT: Priority ADA Project Groups 1 - 9 �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 144
Table 17. Seven Key Solutions to Improve Pedestrian Safety at Intersections. ����������������������������������������������������������������������������170
Map 24. COA: Priority ADA Project Groups 1 - 5 ������ 148
Table 19. Focus Group Meeting Findings and Recommendations ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������192
Map 25. Public Input Score ������������������������������������������������������������157 Map 26. NCDOT: Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1 - 9 ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 158
Table 18. Other Resources and Design Standards �����197 Table 20. Goal 1: Equity ���������������������������������������������������������������������� 204
Map 27. COA: Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1 4 ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������162
Table 21. Goal 2: Greenway Network ����������������������������������������205
Map 28. Regional Connections ��������������������������������������������������203
Table 23. Goal 4: Pedestrian Network ����������������������������������209
Table 22. Goal 3: Pedestrian Network �����������������������������������207 Table 24. Goal 5: Project Development ����������������������������������212 Table 25. Goal 6: Policy ��������������������������������������������������������������������������214 Table 26. Goal 7: Funding ��������������������������������������������������������������������216
Table 27. Goal 8: Tools �������������������������������������������������������������������������� 217 Table 28. Goal 9: Safety �����������������������������������������������������������������������219 Table 29. Goal 10: Multimodal Vision ��������������������������������������221
QUICK SHEETS Quick Sheets #1:Things to Know Before You Read this Plan ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 14 Quick Sheets #2:Close the GAP Facility Types �������������� 15 Quick Sheets #3:Pedestrian Crash Analysis ��������������������32 Quick Sheets #4:Things to Know About Prioritizing and Funding for Projects Before the Design �������������������� 72 Quick Sheets #5: What is the Difference Between the ADA Transition Plan and Pedestrian Plan? ����������������� 132 Quick Sheets #6: Top ADA Focus Group Priorities: Facilities and Design Items ������������������������������������������������������140 Quick Sheets #7: Top ADA Focus Group Priorities: Maintenance and Policy Items ��������������������������������������������������������� 141 Quick Sheets #8:Key Elements of NCDOT Complete Streets Project Evaluation Methodology ������������������������166 Quick Sheets #9:Recommended Project Implementation Process ������������������������������������������������������������180 Quick Sheets #10: Pre-Design Project Development Checklist ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 182 Quick Sheets #11: FAQ’s on Project Development & Next Steps �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������183
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
1
THE VISION
“
Bring able to cycle or walk off the road, paved or unpaved, to more schools, businesses, communities of worship, etc and area communities is a win for pedestrians, cyclists, the city and region” -
2 /// GAP Plan /
- Survey Respondent
1
THE VISION This chapter provides an overview of Close the GAP and the Plan’s framework, which comprises the vision, goals, and objectives, and it lays the foundation for implementation recommendations found in later chapters.
I N TRO D U C T IO N Through many different planning efforts, Asheville citizens and its leadership have said they want better and more options to get from place to place. Our community’s vision indicates that providing options to travel by methods other than driving - such as walking, biking, or riding the bus - are important for the future of the City. These methods of travel are known as multimodal transportation options, or modes of transportation. When streets and greenways accommodate different modes of transportation, it is easier for all people to move about in our City. Multimodal transportation choices promote our City’s values of equity, sustainability, and building a more vibrant community for our residents. Several plans guide the City’s efforts to build a better multimodal network. Close the GAP will replace some plans and complement or make recommendations to other City plans.
CLO S E TH E G A P Close the GAP is a three component plan that replaces the City of Asheville’s existing Greenway (G), ADA Transition (A), and Pedestrian (P) Plans. The combined plans, or Close the GAP, is the City’s new vision to update and expand the network
of accessible sidewalks and greenways in our community. In addition, Close the GAP makes recommendations pertaining to the City’s policies and design standards for these transportation elements.
Vision Close the GAP’s vision provides the foundation for improving walking in Asheville: Asheville is a place where vibrant, safe, and comfortable streets and greenways give everyone the opportunity to walk to their destinations and to enjoy the convenience and health benefits of walking. This vision sets the framework for Close the GAP’s goals and objectives. It also guides development of the policies, actions, and prioritization criteria, which are described in following chapters. In addition to the overall vision for walking in Asheville, each component of Close the GAP has a vision statement.
VISION Asheville is a place where vibrant, safe, and comfortable streets and greenways give everyone the opportunity to walk to their destinations and to enjoy the convenience and health benefits of walking.”
/
GAP Plan
/// 3
GREENWAY PLAN VISION
TRANSITION PLAN VISION
PEDESTRIAN PLAN VISION
Asheville’s greenway network connects all areas of the City in order to allow people to move throughout the City on a continuous network, either on foot or by bike.
Asheville’s priority pedestrian corridors will allow people to move about without barriers on corridors that are ADA compliant to the maximum extent feasible.
Asheville’s new sidewalk network will close gaps in the pedestrian network so that people in Asheville can walk from their home to key destinations along a network of streets which prioritize pedestrian mobility.
The Results Realizing Close the GAP’s vision is dependent on achieving Close the GAP’s 10 goals and 56 action items. The desired result is the complete pedestrian and greenway network depicted in Map 1.
MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION “...we have to make sure that we allow people to experience the City in all ways.” - Mayor Esther Manheimer, November 2018, Charlotte Street Road Diet Council Vote
4 /// GAP Plan /
Map 1. Close the GAP Proposed Network
/
GAP Plan
/// 5
2
1
Image 1 / Neighborhood Greenway Showing a Small Roundabout and Facilities that Prioritize Bicyclists and Pedestrians. (Source: Active Transportation Alliance)
3
Image 2 / Traditional Greenway in Asheville. (Source: Sealy Chipley) Image 3 / Eugene, OR Neighborhood Greenway Signage. (Source: City of Eugene, OR)
GR E E NWAY PLAN (G) A greenway is a multimodal transportation route that people can use for walking, biking, running, roller skating, using a wheelchair, and other activities. They are facilities for all ages and abilities and can be used for transportation and recreation. Currently, most of Asheville’s greenways are linear corridors of land that tend to follow features such as rivers or other natural features, or manmade features such as utility lines. The plan that guided the City’s greenway efforts before Close the GAP was the Greenway Master Plan Update (2013). Much has changed since 2013 when the vision for greenways was more recreational in nature. Since 2013, our greenways have become an important part of our multimodal transportation network, and Close the GAP was the City’s opportunity to rethink how it builds and connects the future greenway network. For example, Asheville’s early greenway strategy was to create greenways that are separated from the roadway. New plans, such as the
6 /// GAP Plan /
Greenways Connector projects, offer plans for on-road greenway segments. The Close the GAP plan defines a new set of greenway options, including a Greenway Spine, Arterial Greenways, and Neighborhood Greenways. These types of greenways will be used to create the right size greenway for different locations. The new plan also defines greenway corridors, which could be a combination of on-road and off-road facilities. The Greenway component of Close the GAP also provides an implementation plan that describes the ideal order in which the projects will be planned and built. Finally, included in this effort are design standards and specifications for greenways, on-street connectors, and exploration of a natural surface trails effort, known as Asheville Unpaved.
5
4
Image 4 / Navigating Our City with a Wheelchair is a Challenge. Image 5 / Example of a Missing Curb Ramp.
6
Image 6 / Curb Ramp and a Crosswalk.
A DA T R A NS I T IO N PLAN (A) Many people with disabilities in our City rely on our multimodal network as their primary, or only, way to get from place to place. According to the 2019 American Community Survey, 12.2% of Asheville’s population has some type of disability. Other sources report a greater disability presence. It is the City’s responsibility to ensure that people with disabilities can move about its transportation network without barriers.
sidewalks, road crossings and pedestrian signals, greenways, bus stops, and on-street parking. The overall goal of the Transition Plan is to remove barriers in Asheville’s public rights-of-way so that pedestrians with disabilities can fully access all the amenities the City has to offer.
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 is a civil rights law that prohibits discrimination based on someone’s disability. Title II of the Act requires cities and towns to have a plan to make accommodations for everyone. The ADA Transition Plan (or Transition Plan for short) component of Close the GAP is the City’s ADA Self-Evaluation and will result in a new Transition Plan for the City’s Public Rights-of-Way. The Transition Plan will result in a plan to upgrade the City’s existing public rights-of-way network. Examples of public rights-of-way include public streets,
/
GAP Plan
/// 7
8
7
Image 7 / Worn Pathways, or Goat Trails, Indicate Where Sidewalks May be Needed. Image 8 / Constructing New Sidewalks is More than just a Sidewalk - Wood Avenue. Required a New Retaining Wall.
9
P EDE S T R I A N P L A N ( P) Everyone is a pedestrian, whether they intend to walk/roll, or use walking and rolling as a means to take other modes of travel. When you walk from your car or bike parking spot into the grocery store, you are a pedestrian. When you take transit, you are a pedestrian. The Pedestrian Plan aims to create a great walking network for all pedestrians. The Close the GAP Pedestrian Plan identifies the new sidewalks, crossings, and other facilities that make walking safe and comfortable for all of us. The Pedestrian Plan also provides policy and procedure recommendations to improve how the City and other partners build new sidewalk connections.
8 /// GAP Plan /
Image 9 / New Sidewalk Constructed through a New Development Project.
CO N N EC T I NG TO T H E V I SION Close the GAP’s vision, equity statement, goals, and actions will guide how the City implements the Plan. Additionally, the vision, the equity statement, goals, and actions reach beyond this Plan. Planning a great network for all walkers complements many of the goals found in other City plans, particularly the City’s comprehensive plan, Living Asheville. Building the Close the GAP network is guided by previous City plans and Close the GAP following elements: The vision provides the long-term direction for walking within the City of Asheville. It depicts the future vision Close the GAP will achieve when implemented.
The equity statement makes the case that building walk friendly communities is no longer a consideration - it is an imperative to building equitable communities.
The ten goals provide guidance on the condition the City is trying to achieve.
LIVING ASHEVILLE ENVISIONS THE CITY AS: “a great place to live because we care about people, we invest in our City, and we celebrate our natural and cultural heritage. Our City is for everyone. Our urban environment and locally-based economy support workers, entrepreneurs and business owners, families and tourists, and people of all ages. Cultural diversity and social and economic equity are evident in all that we do. Our neighborhoods are strong, participation in civic life is widespread, and collaborative partnerships are the foundation of our success. What makes us special is: • • • • • • • •
A diverse community A well-planned and livable community A clean and healthy environment Quality affordable housing Transportation and accessibility Thriving local economy Connected and engaged community Smart City
The 56 action items detail how the City can achieve each goal. The vision, goals, and action items comprise the Close the GAP Policy Framework, which is summarized in the Policy Framework at a Glance section below. Chapter 10 includes the full set of goals and recommended action items.
/
GAP Plan
/// 9
Equity Statement Building walk friendly communities is no longer a consideration - it is an imperative to building equitable communities. The benefits to better walking can be experienced by both the individual and the overall community. In a City like Asheville, where there are limited pedestrian facilities, these impacts are significant. Mobility for People Walking A person walking is the fundamental transportation system user and is the baseline for any system. By planning for people walking, we are planning for all users including the most vulnerable: young, aged and disabled. Walking provides quick and convenient access and is the most affordable transportation mode. Walking is a part of every trip; regardless of a person’s primary mode of transportation, whether that be bicycling, transit or a personal vehicle, each trip begins and ends as a pedestrian. Driving Isn’t an Option for Everyone Simply put, travel by vehicle isn’t an option for everyone. Many people are physically unable to drive a vehicle, cannot afford the onerous costs of car ownership, or choose not to drive for other reasons. Socio-economic factors such as age, disability,
Figure 1. Not All People Can (or Want to) Drive (Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates (2014-2018)).
race and income all impact transportation choice. Providing transportation options and access for these individuals can mean freedom of movement, which translates to significant benefits to the individual and community. The Benefits Walking provides freedom of mobility and access, which is especially meaningful to youth, aged adults, people with disabilities and people with limited income. Mobility for people walking out of necessity is critical to access jobs, healthcare and resources. It is important to consider diverse mobility needs as we plan our transportation systems, giving everyone an opportunity to thrive. Safety People walking are known as vulnerable users of our streets given the inherent fact that they are not protected by a vehicle if involved in a collision, and also because they are disproportionately represented in crashes. This means that the number of people walking involved in crashes exceeds the number of people who choose to walk. The most recent data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reveals that in 2019 in the US, pedestrian deaths accounted for 17% of all traffic fatalities, which rose from 13% in 2010.1 Nationally, Black / African American and American Indian / Alaska Native people die while walking at higher rates when compared to white, non-Hispanic, Asian and Pacific-Islander people.2 Although these findings present significant challenges, there are proven engineering solutions at hand, which are explored in Close the GAP. When roads are designed to be safe and accommodating for people walking (and biking), they become safer for all transportation users.3 By designing for people walking, communities can build safe transportation systems that everyone deserves. Health, Economics & Sustainability Roads that are designed for people walking have positive health, economic, and sustainability outcomes for communities such as Asheville. Health benefits of walkable communities include not only the reduction of serious injury and fatality, but also positive outcomes such as reduction in chronic disease, heart disease and cancer. Walking improves the economy at many scales - the individual, business and community at-large. And finally, walking enables communities such as Asheville to achieve its goals towards sustainability and climate change.
10 /// GAP Plan /
Building walk friendly communities is no longer a consideration - it is an imperative to building equitable communities.
/
GAP Plan
/// 11
POLICY FRAMEWORK AT A GLANCE Vision Asheville is a place where vibrant, safe, and comfortable streets and greenways give everyone the opportunity to walk to their destinations and to enjoy the convenience and health benefits of walking.
Goals GOAL 1: Equity Close the GAP network implementation results in a walkable and accessible community for all, no matter where you live or who you are. GOAL 2: Greenway City of Asheville residents and stakeholders travel along the greenway network on existing and new types of greenways. GOAL 3: ADA Transition Using Close the GAP’s ADA Transition Plan as a guide, the City of Asheville’s pedestrian network is ADA compliant to the maximum extent feasible.
12 /// GAP Plan /
GOAL 4: Pedestrian Using Close the GAP as a guide, the pedestrians in the City of Asheville can walk from home (however one defines home) to key destinations along a network of streets comfortable for people who walk. GOAL 5: Project Development Using Close the GAP as a guide, the City of Asheville has increased capacity to deliver quality pedestrian projects. GOAL 6: Policy Using Close the GAP as a guide, the City of Asheville has updated and new policies to guide pedestrian and greenway network development. GOAL 7: Funding The City of Asheville has identified adequate, consistent, and wide-ranging funding sources to implement the Close the GAP Network.
GOAL 9: Safety As a result of implementing pedestrian safety best practices, pedestrian crashes in the City are significantly reduced. GOAL 10: Multimodal Close the GAP is integrated with other multimodal plans and programs to reach the City’s overall multimodal vision.
Recommended Actions The 56 recommended action items will help the City of Asheville meet the 10 goals and the Close the GAP vision.
GOAL 8: Tools Using a variety of existing and new technology and communication tools, the City of Asheville and its residents and stakeholders are informed about Close the GAP implementation progress and can interact with the City to request / share emerging needs.
/
GAP Plan
/// 13
Quick Sheets #1:
Things to Know Before You Read this Plan
The transportation field uses many words and acronyms that are not common in everyday conversation. Here we describe key concepts and infrastructure types. In the Appendix, a full glossary of definitions is available to readers.
Multimodal Transportation
Network
In Asheville, our multimodal options include the sidewalk network, greenways, on-street bicycle facilities, and our bus system, Asheville Rides Transit (ART). Additionally, Mountain Mobility provides a form of public transportation.
When we talk about a network, we mean a system of things that are connected and operate together. For example, Asheville’s multimodal network consists of greenways, sidewalks, onstreet bicycle facilities, and the bus system. A network functions well when people can conveniently get to the places they want or need to go using our bus, greenway, bicycle, and/or sidewalk systems.
Connectivity
Facilities
A community is connected (or has connectivity) when the transportation network links people to the places they want to go through safe, continuous and comfortable networks.
A facility is a general term referring to improvements and provisions made to accommodate bicycling or walking. A facility could be the surface on which one walks or bikes - such as a sidewalk - or the equipment that enables a person walking to activate a traffic light. The most common facility types in Close the GAP are indicated on the following page.
14 /// GAP Plan /
Quick Sheets #2:
Close the GAP Facility Types
Sidewalk
Pedestrian Signal Head
A designated space along the side of a street for use by people walking.
Mounted on the traffic light, these are intended to communicate to the person walking whether it is safe to walk.
Multi-Use Sidepath
Curb Ramps
A two-way shared use path located immediately adjacent and parallel to the roadway. Photo courtsey of pedbikeimages.org / Reuben Moore
Sloped surfaces that connect the sidewalk to the street. When designed according to ADA law, ramps allow people using a mobility device to mount and dismount sidewalk curbs.
Greenway
Pedestrian Crossing
An on- or off-street connector used for transportation or recreation.
Locations where a pedestrian may legally cross the street and where curb ramps must be provided. Crossings can occur at intersections or mid-block locations and may be accompanied by signs, paint markings (e.g. crosswalks) and traffic control (e.g. stop signs, traffic lights or flashing devices).
Paved Shoulder Paved, designated space on the edge of the roadway that is striped and on the same level as the street.
Pedestrian Push Button A device at a traffic light that can be used by a pedestrian to activate the walk/don’t walk pedestrian signal.
Neighborhood Greenway While not a designated facility in the sense that a traditional greenway is, a neighborhood greenway occurs on an existing neighborhood street to improve safety, help people cross busy streets, and keep traffic volume and speeds low. Photo courtsey of pedbikeimages.org / Russ Roca
Plan Plan/// / GAP / GAP /// 15
Chapter 1 Endnotes 1. National Center for Statistics and Analysis. (2021, May). Pedestrians: 2019 data (Traffic Safety Facts. Report No. DOT HS 813 079). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 2. Smart Growth America. (2021). Dangerous by Design. https://smartgrowthamerica.org/dangerous-by-design/ 3. Jacobsen, P.L., Safety in numbers: more walkers and bicyclists, safer walking and bicycling. Injury Prevention, 2003(9): p.205-209.
16 /// GAP Plan /
2
WHERE WE ARE TODAY
“
More, longer greenways and better connectivity!” - West Asheville Resident
18 /// GAP Plan /
2
WHERE WE A R E T O D AY In this chapter, we explore today’s conditions for walking and biking in Asheville. We begin by describing the City’s population and transportation trends and then offer an overview of the current sidewalks and greenways in the City. We close this chapter by describing some of the ways in which we measure what it is like to walk and bike in Asheville today, by investigating crashes and walking rates.
CO M M U N I T Y OV E R V I E W Asheville, incorporated in 1797, is the county seat of Buncombe County and located at the confluence of the French Broad and Swannanoa rivers. It is the largest city in Western North Carolina, and the 12th largest in the state of North Carolina (see Map 1). The city occupies 45.95 square miles and shares a border with several municipalities and the privately owned Biltmore Estate. Being in the Blue Ridge Mountains of Western North Carolina, Asheville’s geography is characterized by rolling hills, mountains, creeks, streams, rivers and small bodies of water. Asheville is a steadily growing community. The City is the fourth-fastest growing municipality in the region as indicated by the French Broad Metropolitan Planning Organization, with an 11% increase in population between 2010 and 2018.1 As a reference, the population in the state of North Carolina increased 9% between 2010 and 2018.2
In the Asheville region, leisure, hospitality, manufacturing and other services, and education and health services exceed the state averages in terms of employment. At the same time, the metro area has a lower portion of jobs in the following sectors, which are often higher wage positions: professional and business services, financial activities, government, and information.3
Demographics The following section is a summary of Asheville’s demographics as revealed in the 2019 U.S. Census American Community Survey (ACS). The ACS is conducted annually (while the full Census is conducted every 10-years) and allows the U.S. Census Bureau to study information based on a sample of the US population. Except for the cost-burdened data, all findings are reported for the 2015-2019 5-year estimates or 2019 1-year estimates. During the development of this plan document, in November of 2021, the U.S. Census Bureau released the 2020 ACS findings; however, due to data collection challenges with COVID-19, the Census Bureau released this “experimental data with weights” and cautioned in using this data as a replacement for standard 2020 ACS 1-year estimates. As such, these findings are based on the 1- and 5-year estimates. Equity Framework Some in our community face greater disparities and vulnerabilities because of factors like who they are, who they represent, and their background. The following are factors that are often used as indicators of those with less equitable outcomes: race, gender, income, English proficiency, disabled population, children and seniors, single parents, education, and those who don’t own cars. In the following demographics overview of Asheville, these indicators are shown in bold.
/
GAP Plan
/// 19
Map 2. Asheville is in the heart of Buncombe County, in Western North Carolina.
20 /// GAP Plan /
Population The population of Asheville was 91,560. The median age was 39 years. An estimated 17.8% of the population was under 18 years and 18.1% was 65 years and older. Much of the Asheville metro has seen an increase in the population over the age of 65 and the City is no exception: since 2010, Asheville has seen an increase by 12.1% of aged adults over 65. About forty-eight percent (47.8%) of the population was male in gender. Figure 1 shows the split of Asheville’s population by gender and age; generally, women represented more of the aged population.
Figure 2. Asheville Population by Gender and Age (Source: U.S. Census).
85 and over 80 to 84 75 to 79 70 to 74 65 to 69 60 to 64 55 to 59 50 to 54 45 to 49 40 to 44 35 to 39 30 to 34 25 to 29 20 to 24 15 to 19 10 to 14 5 to 9 Under 5 10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
Males
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
Females
/
GAP Plan
/// 21
Figure 3. Types of Disabilities in the City of Asheville (Source: U.S. Census).
Hearing difficulty - 3.3% Vision difficulty - 2.3% Cognitive difficulty - 5.7% Ambulatory difficulty - 6.1% Self-care difficulty - 2.7% Independent living difficulty - 6.6%
0
1
2
3
Households There were 40,791 households, with the average household size being 2.16 people. Families made up 47.2% of households in the City. Seventeen percent (17.0%) of households included a child under 18 years of age, and 14.5% of households represented a person over the age of 65 living alone. Single male householders with children under the age of 18 made up 2.9% of the population while single female householders with children under 18 made up 8.9% of the population. Asheville households are relatively stable; 82.3% of people were living in the same residence as one year earlier. Eight percent (7.6%) of households in Asheville had no vehicle available to them; 43.8% of households had one vehicle available and 35.5% had two vehicles available. In Asheville, 48.2% of housing units are owner-occupied. Education Nearly half of Asheville’s population (49.9%) had a bachelor’s degree or higher. An estimated 7.4% did not complete high school. Disability Twelve percent (12.2%) of Asheville had a disability of some form, which are described in Figure 2.
22 /// GAP Plan /
4
5
6
7
Transportation to Work Two percent (2.1%) of workers in Asheville over the age of 16 had no vehicle available. An estimated 74.4% of city workers drove alone to work, and 7.3% carpooled, and 11.3% worked from home (telecommute). Nearly four percent (3.9%) of people walked to work, 1.1% used public transportation and 0.7% biked to work. Among those who did commute to work, it took them an average of 17.9 minutes to travel. Asheville’s commute time to work is relatively less than the County’s average of 20.5 minutes. Asheville’s telecommuting rate is worth noting; it is the sixth highest for any metropolitan area in the country and likely even higher with telecommuting changes with the COVID-19 pandemic.4 Income Asheville’s median household income was $49,930. 13.8% of people in Asheville were living below the poverty level. Compared to the County, the median household income in Buncombe County was $52,207 with 12.2% of people living in poverty.
Race & Ethnicity Eighty-four percent (84.0%) of Asheville identified as white and the remaining identified as BIPOC: Black or African American (11.2%), American Indian or Alaska Native (0.4%), Asian (1.7%), Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander Alone (0.3%) or some other race alone (0.5%). An estimated 6.8% of the people in Asheville were Hispanic. Language Of those residents over the age of 5, 90.6% spoke only English and 5.9% of residents spoke English “less than very well” at home. Housing Costs For owner-occupied houses in Asheville, the median property value was $270,400. The median monthly housing cost for owners with a mortgage was $1,457 and for renters was $1,043. Households that pay 30% or more of their income on housing costs are considered cost burdened. Cost burdened households in Asheville accounted for 31.2% of owners with a mortgage and 54.1% of renters). It should be noted that the “true” cost of housing factors in transportation costs to provide a more accurate assessment of housing choice and thereby housing cost. This is a concept known as Housing+Transportation Affordability Index,5 which was not calculated for this analysis but should be considered.
WHAT IS BIPOC? BIPOC stands for “Black, Indigenous, and people of color”, and is personfirst language that acknowledges people and humanity. This language is intended to shift away from words like “minority” or “disadvantaged.” Other person-first language used in this Plan is “people walking” and “people driving” which is intended to remind us that we are all people and humans are our highest priority.
Figure 4. Combining Housing and Vehicle Cost, We Begin to Understand the True Cost of Living in Asheville (Source: City of Asheville and NerdWallet).
AFFORDABLE HOUSING Vehicles are Expensive
AVL RENTERS Housing Wage Ave. Rent Shortfall
$831 $1,148 $317
$700 AVERAGE MONTHLY VEHICLE COST
/
GAP Plan
/// 23
46,421
21,017
15,845
70,529
2002 Asheville
21,830
17,925
2018 Asheville
Figure 5. Analysis of Where People are Starting Their Work Commute Trips (Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics).
Computer & Internet Access An estimated 11.2% of households in Asheville had no access to a computer; 77.6% had access to a desktop or laptop and 78.3% had access to a smartphone. Eighty-four percent (84.0%) of households had an internet subscription of some type. Putting It Together: Transportation Currently, Asheville sees low, but growing, walking and biking rates, as reported for transportation to work. Many households in the City are cost-burdened in terms of their mortgage or rent costs. The City’s poverty rate is higher, and the median household income is lower, than the county average. Asheville is seeing a growing aged adult population, and the disabled population is on-par with county- and state-wide averages. Asheville has a larger portion of their population over the age of 16 that is currently employed.
Jobs and Housing The Census makes data available related to employment, job flows, earnings, and commute patterns in a tool called OnTheMap. An analysis of 2018 data shows that, of the jobs in Asheville, 70,529 of people lived outside of the City and commuted
24 /// GAP Plan /
in. The remaining 21,830 jobs in Asheville were held by people who lived in Asheville.6 In Figure 5, these findings are compared to 2002 data: of the jobs in Asheville in 2002, 46,421 of people lived outside the City and commuted in; the remaining 21,017 were held by people who lived in Asheville.7 Over the last two decades, the number of non-city residents who commuted into the City has risen dramatically from 46,421 to 70,529 while the portion of City residents who stay for work has remained steady. This large daily influx of people to the City is a strain on its infrastructure and resources. These values are illustrated in Figure 5.
NET WORK OVERVI E W Asheville’s transportation network includes City roads, NCDOT-managed roads, and private roads. To understand how Close the GAP fits into the bigger picture of transportation planning in the City, County and region, it is helpful to understand how the transportation network operates and is functioning. This section of Close the GAP provides an overview of the network including the key components: transportation broadly, pedestrian, greenway, transit and bicycle.
2002
WALKABLE STREETS “Walkable streets encourage people to experience an area on foot and provide a comfortable, enjoyable and safe pedestrian experience, including those with disabilities.” -Living Asheville Comprehensive Plan (2018) Image 10 / Where the French Broad River West Greenway meets a sidewalk, bicycle facility, a bus stop and a street is a great example of a multimodal network.
/
GAP Plan
/// 25
Figure 6. The Lifecycle of a Pedestrian and Bicycle Project.
Transportation Network Asheville’s major transportation infrastructure includes Interstates 40, 240 and 26 as well as the Asheville Regional Airport. Major corridors that traverse the City include: Merrimon Avenue, New Leicester Highway, Patton Avenue, Haywood Road, Charlotte Street, McDowell Street, Hendersonville Road, Biltmore Avenue, Tunnel Road, Fairview Road and Broadway Street. Most of these roads are owned and maintained by the NCDOT. The mountainous terrain of Asheville has resulted in a limited street network that challenges interconnectivity; as a result, there is not an extensive grid system that commonly provides alternative streets or parallel roadways in a network. Asheville's multimodal network contains a system of sidewalks for pedestrians to walk, on-street places to ride a bicycle, and greenways (sometimes called multiuse or shared-use paths) to walk or bicycle. The City's bus system, Asheville Rides Transit (ART), is an important part of our multimodal network. While Close the GAP has not resulted in new bicycle or transit plans, it is attentive to how the pedestrian and greenway networks interact with the City's other modes of transportation. Throughout the City, we have a variety of planned network connections, many of which were identified through an earlier City-led planning process, such as the 2013 Greenway Master Plan Update or the Asheville in Motion Mobility Plan. The City is also a member of the French Broad River MPO (the MPO), our area's regional transportation planning
26 /// GAP Plan /
organization. Initial funding for some planned projects, which are developed in cooperation with the City and often with NCDOT, begins with the MPO. NCDOT also plans and develops multimodal projects. Close the GAP will help the City, the MPO, and NCDOT redefine and re-prioritize planned projects. The Close the GAP plans will serve as the document that guides projects from ideas through implementation. Figure 6 describes the part of the lifecycle of a pedestrian and bicycle project; the green circle represents the stage that the Close the GAP Plan exists within. The following sections provide an overview of Asheville's greenway, sidewalk, and other multimodal facilities.
Greenway Network Close the GAP will evaluate, revise, and re-prioritize planned greenway corridors. While Asheville doesn't quite have a connected greenway network, we're busy building the backbone of our future network. Today, we have 6.61 miles of existing greenways segments. All but the Hominy Creek Natural Surface Trail are paved. What We’ve Built Map 3 illustrates where current greenways exist in Asheville. The long-anticipated River Arts District Transportation Improvement Plan (RADTIP) was completed during the development of this Plan, in June 2021. Among many other elements, RADTIP includes the new 2.2-mile-long section of the Wilma Dykeman Greenway. Just across the river, the French Broad River West Bank greenway corridor was also
Map 3. Existing Greenways and Sidewalks in the City of Asheville.
Beaver Lake
Woodfin 26
Source: City of Asheville Open Data
240 240 40
40
40
Biltmore Estate
Biltmore Forest
26
Lake Julian
AVL Regional Airport
Fletcher
Mills River Buncombe County, NC, State of North Carolina DOT, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologie NASA, USGS, EPA
/
GAP Plan
/// 27
2013 Greenway Master Plan The original Greenway Master Plan was approved in 2009. Buncombe County implemented a master plan in 2012, identifying priority corridors that overlapped with some of the City’s corridors. The French Broad Greenway section from Hominy Creek Park to Amboy Road as well as Reed Creek Greenway were the earliest constructed greenways, followed by the Swannanoa Greenway (Riverbend section) near Walmart. In 2013, the City updated the Greenway Master Plan to reflect County plans, coordination with I-26 widening efforts, and refine the network. Since this Master Plan, the following progress has been made: the French Broad Greenway section along New Belgium Brewing was built (2017); Wilma Dykeman Greenway (part of the RADTIP project) was built, and the French Broad Greenway West is under construction (2022 completion).
Figure 7. How Sidewalks and Crossings Get Built.
City-Led / Wood Avenue
under construction during the development of Close the GAP, with anticipated completion in Summer of 2022. Once completed, this section will be 1-mile long.
How Sidewalks and Crossings Get Built There are many ways in which new sidewalks and crossings get built. These programs build new sidewalks and crossings, improve existing sidewalks and crossings and fill in gaps where no sidewalks or crossings exist. In general, a sidewalk or crossing gets constructed through three main categories as illustrated in Figure 7: City-led, NCDOT-led and private development.
28 /// GAP Plan /
Private Development / Gerber Road
Through the GAP Plan, we evaluated the existing network (Map 3) containing 188 miles of sidewalk to determine network gaps; this will result in a plan to close gaps through new pedestrian facilities. The most extensive network of existing sidewalks and crosswalks in Asheville exists in the parts of the City that were first annexed in the late 1800s and through the turn of the century. Outside of this core sidewalk network, many of the City’s key corridors, such as Tunnel Road and Patton Avenue, have sidewalks. To further understand what sidewalks have been built, it is helpful to understand how sidewalks, crosswalks and crossing treatments are constructed in the City.
NCDOT-Led / Fariview Road
Pedestrian Network
City-Led Generally, City-led projects fall into three areas. In 2014, the City of Asheville began setting aside specific money for building new sidewalks in neighborhoods. This annual funding established the Neighborhood Sidewalk Program, which prioritizes the construction of new neighborhood sidewalks throughout the City. A recent example are the sidewalks along Wood Avenue between Future Drive and the Target shopping center. The City oversees these projects through the Transportation and Capital Projects Departments. In 2016, Asheville voters favorably supported a general obligation bond referendum that allowed the City to issue new debt for parks and recreation, affordable housing, and transportation projects. Included in the general obligation bond for transportation projects were 24 sidewalk construction and improvement projects. These capital projects were identified through community input with consideration to equity and fairness across the City. An example of recent bond-funded sidewalks include new sidewalks on Hill Street. The City also funds various maintenance programs through bond funding, such as street repaving and upgrades to traffic lights which also repair and replace sidewalks and curb ramps at intersections. The City oversees these projects through the Transportation Department, Capital Projects Department, and Public Works Department. The City actively seeks grant funding for sidewalks. Typically, only new sidewalk projects can be funded by grants, which usually comes from federal transportation funds, and are awarded through the French Broad River Metropolitan Planning Organization and administered through the NCDOT. The City received funding for most of the River Arts District Improvement Project (RADTIP) through a federal TIGER (now known as RAISE – Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity) grant. The City oversees these projects through the Transportation and Capital Projects Departments. A local match of at least 20% of the project cost is normally required for grants.
guides the statewide agency to partner with the local agency (in this case, Asheville) to make necessary accommodations for pedestrians through sidewalks and other facilities. A 2022 update to the policy offers additional methodology and guidance for Complete Streets Review. Depending on the type and origin of the project, NCDOT may pay for the entire project or share in the cost with the City. The NCDOT also makes various funding available that can support sidewalk construction and maintenance projects. For instance, the NCDOT installed new sidewalks on Fairview Road from Swannanoa River Road to Sona Pharmacy through its SPOT Safety funding program. Private Development or Redevelopment According to the City’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), sidewalks are required for some levels of new construction and for renovations, additions or expansions to existing structures. This means that sidewalks should be installed when land is developed or redeveloped if required by City standards. Similarly, as parcels of land are redeveloped to a certain extent, sidewalks will also need to be constructed. For example, most of the sidewalk along Gerber Road was built by developers during new construction projects. The City oversees these projects through the Development Services Department. Sidewalk Maintenance In Asheville, it is the abutting property owner’s responsibility to keep sidewalks, grass strips, drainage and gutters clear and clean. This includes clearing dirt, grass, weeds, mud, trash and vegetation of any kind to prevent a hazard to the public. In the event of a winter weather event, this responsible property owner must remove snow, hail, sleet or other accumulations within 48 hours after the precipitation ceases to fall. As quoted from the City’s UDO, if ice accumulates from any source other than from a weather event, the property owner must remove the ice, “from the sidewalk on or before 10:00 a.m. each day in which the temperature exceeds 40 degrees Fahrenheit.”
NCDOT-Led Another way that sidewalks get built are with the City working in close coordination with NCDOT. Whether it is a roadway, bridge or sidewalk-specific project, NCDOT’s 2019 Complete Streets policy
/
GAP Plan
/// 29
Other Network Considerations Close the GAP's focus is the greenway and sidewalk networks the City will develop. However, other multimodal transportation projects are essential to building a complete greenway and sidewalk network in the City. Asheville Rides Transit ART (Asheville Rides Transit) provides bus service throughout the City of Asheville and to the Town of Black Mountain. There are a total of 18 routes that are named based on the approximate area of Asheville they serve (e.g., S1 serves south Asheville and N1 for north Asheville). All routes originate at the ART Transit Station at 49 Coxe Avenue in downtown. Everyone is a pedestrian at some point in their trip, and this is especially true for transit. Understanding transit in relation to a pedestrian and bicycle network is important as both modal opportunities offer enhancements to each other and are most effective when they operate as a unit. The phrase “first and last mile” is frequently used when understanding transportation systems and is a reference to the first and last leg of a transit trip – the parts of the trip that go from the origin to the bus stop, and the bus stop to the destination. For transit systems to be effective, the “first and last mile” of a person’s trip is often taken as a pedestrian. When both systems are in place, transit is safe, efficient and connected. Transit and pedestrian planning go together, and the City integrates transit into its pedestrian planning efforts. For example, in its Neighborhood Sidewalk Policy, proximity to a transit stop is a factor in project selection and prioritization. Similarly, proximity to transit was a critical area in understanding pedestrian gaps for this plan document. Bicycle Network In the same way that Asheville has streets, sidewalks and crossings that are good for people walking, the same is true for people biking. Asheville has on-street bicycle facilities, such as bike lanes and shared-use arrows, and has a plan to expand that network. These on-street bike facilities can have a great benefit to the pedestrian environment. While some choose to ride their bicycle on the sidewalk because it feels safer,8 evidence shows that it is not safer for people biking and it puts pedestrians at peril.9 Studies conducted by cities that have implemented high quality bike infrastructure, such as Washington DC10 and New York City,11 see a decline in sidewalk bicycle riding when dedicated, comfortable on-street bike facilities are constructed. When bicycle
30 /// GAP Plan /
facilities are well-designed, they discourage people from riding their bikes on the sidewalk, thereby improving conditions for pedestrians. As an added benefit, streets with bicycle facilities are proven to be safer for all users, including pedestrians.12 Bike facilities contribute to a higherquality pedestrian environment as they buffer the sidewalk from the traffic on the road and shorten the distance that pedestrians need to cross vehicle travel lanes at intersections and mid-block locations. As Asheville begins to plan for its multimodal connections, we are no longer thinking of greenways as off-road paths, only. Portions of our greenways may be on-street and may join or complement our City’s bicycle network. Similarly, neighborhood greenways (low traffic, neighborhood streets) serve both people walking and biking. Corridor Studies Some of our City’s busiest corridors are difficult for pedestrians to navigate. The City, the French Broad River Metropolitan Planning Organization (FBRMPO), and the County have worked together to study the multimodal transportation mobility and land use on the corridors illustrated in Map 4. While each corridor is unique, their current challenges share this common thread: the land surrounding the corridor has changed significantly, due to residential population growth and complementary commercial development. This puts pressure on the corridor which has not significantly changed in several decades. Each of these studies provide a deeper analysis of transportation needs, consider a range of solutions, and offer recommendations that are incorporated with Close the GAP.
Map 4. Multimodal Corridor Studies MERRIMON AVENUE CORRIDOR STUDY This is a study and process to determine how multimodal goals can be achieved during NCDOT’s plans to repave Merrimon. The City of Asheville is advocating for a 4 to 3 lane road diet.
Source: City of Asheville, FBRMPO
I-26 CONNECTOR PROJECTS As a part of the I-26 Connector Project, the City of Asheville worked with NCDOT to identify multimodal facilities to connect West Asheville to Downtown. The projects will be implemented during I-26 construction.
BILTMORE MCDOWELL CORRIDOR STUDY The City of Asheville adopted this corridor study in November 2022. It contains a mixture of multimodal options to connect downtown to Biltmore Village.
TUNNEL ROAD CORRIDOR STUDY The Tunnel Road Corridor Study evaluated multimodal connections and safety improvements spanning from Beaucatcher Tunnel to Tunnel Road’s intersection with Swannanoa River Road. The plan was adopted in November 2022.
HENDERSONVILLE ROAD CORRIDOR STUDY The Hendersonville Road Corridor Study outlines multimodal and safety options from Rock Hill Road to Sweeten Creek Road. City Council adopted the plan in November 2022.
MERRIMON AVENUE CORRIDOR STUDY
I-26 CONNECTOR PROJECTS
BILTMORE MCDOWELL CORRIDOR STUDY
/
GAP Plan
/// 31
Quick Sheets #3:
Pedestrian Crash Analysis
Studying the 271 crashes involving pedestrians between 2014 – 2018, we can get a glimpse of trends and measures of pedestrian safety in the City.13 The findings described in this section are for reported crashes where a police officer arrives at the scene and issues a crash report. The team developed its crash analysis during the existing conditions portion of the project, at which time 2018 data was the most current. Map 5 illustrates the location of these crashes. A review of reported crashes is one way to measure safety, however, this does not provide the full story of safety on a corridor. For instance, in some cases, there may be few or no crashes on a corridor because there are no dedicated sidewalks or because it feels so unsafe. In this scenario, studying crash reports only provides a limited understanding of safety. In the following chapter, we explore pedestrian safety as it is perceived by people walking and biking, which adds another dimension to understanding comfort in the walking environment. And in Chapter 4, we will describe how this crash data is paired with other measures of pedestrian safety, such as vehicle speed, to develop a safety score and prioritize projects. Collectively, these findings help us have a broader understanding of pedestrian safety.
CRASH IMPACT This investigates the level of severity, or how bad, pedestrian crashes are across Asheville.
Crash Severity Statewide, 18% of on-road pedestrian crashes resulted in a fatality or severe injury. 8.5% of Asheville's crashes were fatal or severe. Of the 271 reported crashes from 2014 – 2018, 14 involved a fatality.
Ambulance-Called Statewide, ambulances were called to the scene for 77% of on-roadway pedestrian crashes. Ambulances were called for 64% of Asheville's pedestrian crashes.
Hit and Run Crashes Statewide, 22% of on-roadway crashes involved a hit and run of a pedestrian, which is lower than Asheville's 24%.
ROADWAY CONDITIONS This explores factors pertaining to roadway conditions at the crash location.
Speed In NC, the highest percentage (41%) of crashes are on 30-35 mph roadways. In Asheville, the higher percentage of crashes are also on 30-35 mph roadways (40%).
Number of Lanes In NC and Asheville, the highest percent of crashes occur on 2-lane roadways: 52% in NC, and 40% in Asheville.
32 /// GAP Plan /
Presence of Traffic Control A traffic-controlled location is when something like a traffic light (signal) or a stop sign is present. Double yellow lines, warning signs, and no control of any type are examples of no presence of traffic control. In NC, 70% of pedestrian crashes are at uncontrolled locations with no traffic devices; compared to 40% in Asheville.
Crash Location Statewide, 71% of pedestrian crashes occurred in intersections or were intersection related, compared to half (50%) of Asheville crashes.
It is important to note that Asheville has a high percentage of Unknown or Missing race data; 30% of pedestrian crashes in Asheville do not have known race data.
Gender Across NC and Asheville, men are more likely to be involved in a pedestrian crash; 62% of crashes involved men in NC and 43% in Asheville. It is important to note that Asheville has a high percentage of Unknown/Missing gender (33% Unknown in Asheville, 3% across NC).
Pedestrian Position In NC, well over half (62%) of pedestrians were in the travel lane when the crash occurred. In Asheville, 50% of pedestrian crashes occurred in a travel lane.
CRASH TIMING The following shares some insight to when the crash occurred.
PEDESTRIAN INFORMATION The following detail describes the demographics of the person walking who was involved in the crash.
Age Group In NC, the adult group (age 19-59) comprises the majority, or 68% of pedestrian crashes. The same is true for Asheville (70%).
Race In NC, 52% of pedestrian crashes involve BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color), 4% are unknown, and 44% involve pedestrians that are white. In Asheville, BIPOC crashes represent 20% of crashes, and white pedestrians are involved in 50% of crashes.
Crash Month In NC, the months with the highest number of crashes are October, November, and December, representing 31% of all crashes. In Asheville the top crash months are October, September, and July, representing 30% of all crashes in the City.
Crash Day In NC, Fridays have the highest percentage of all crashes (16%). In Asheville, Monday is the day with the highest percentage of crashes (20%).
Crash Year In NC, crashes increased by 13% between 2014 and 2018 while in Asheville they increased by 49%. Table 1 provides a snapshot of annual crashes in NC and Asheville.
/
GAP Plan
/// 33
Map 5. Reported Pedestrian-Involved Crashes in the City of Asheville Source: NCDOT, 2014-2018 Pedestrian Crashes
34 /// GAP Plan /
C U RREN T WA L K I NG R AT E S Strava Understanding bicycle and pedestrian patterns through the Strava platform was part of the Close the GAP analysis. However, due to the data use agreement between the City and Strava, the City cannot report specific findings from the data. Some of the general findings gleaned from the data include:
Table 2. The Share of the Asheville Population (Percentage) that Walks to Work (Source: U.S. Census)
• Total pedestrian commute trips have increased between 2019 and 2020, and the number of trips in 2021 has surpassed 2020
2010
• Total number of people recording walking trips while using Strava increased between 2019 and 2020, and the number of people recording trips in 2021 has surpassed 2020
2012
2.7%
2011
3.3% 3.7%
2013
• People between the ages of 20 and 54 are more likely to use Strava to record trips
2014
U.S. Census
2016
4.1% 4.2%
2015
Transportation to work data is collected by the U.S. Census Bureau and is described in the demographics section of this chapter. Table 2 describes the share of the Asheville population that chose to walk to work for the last decade. These are approximations provided through the American Community Survey, 5-year estimates for each year reported. The data shows an increase in the walking commute rate through 2015, with a decline in 2016 followed by a leveling out around 3.9% in the ensuing years to 2019.
4.8% 4.5%
2017
3.8%
2018
3.8%
2019
3.9% Commute to Work - Share by Walking
Table 1. Total Crashes in North Carolina and Asheville, 2014-2019 (Source: NCDOT)
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2,119
2,158
2,246
2,237
2,405
2,240
1.8%
4.1%
-0.4%
7.5%
-6.9%
38
54
51
76
31
-26.9%
42.1%
-5.6%
49.0%
-59.2%
NC
Annual % Change AVL Annual % Change
52
/
GAP Plan
/// 35
Short-Duration Pedestrian Counts Annually, the City of Asheville’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Task Force hosts a volunteer survey to count the number of people walking and biking through an intersection. The survey typically takes place from 5:00-7:00 p.m. on a Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday of the second full week in September. The data reviewed here is for the 2019 collection year. Map 6 and Table 3 show the pedestrian counts at various locations in Asheville, comparing the average from 2014-2018 and the 2019 collection year. Downtown along College St sees the highest numbers of people walking, although the 2019 year reported a decline from previous year averages. Other areas with higher numbers of people walking include South slope area and Haywood Road in West Asheville, both of which saw an increase from years past. Counting along the Chestnut corridor has seen a decline in people walking as well as along W. T. Weaver Boulevard.
Table 3. Number of People Walking (5:00-7:00 p.m.) and Percent Change in Various Areas of Asheville, 2014-2019 (Source: City of Asheville)
Two-Hour Pedestrian Count Region 2014-2018
2019
Percent Change
Downtown (Woodfin & Roundabout)
146
157
7%
Downtown (College Street)
949
808
-17%
South Slope (Hilliard Avenue)
228
297
23%
West Asheville (Haywood Road)
202
352
43%
Chestnut St. Corridor
106
62
-71%
North Asheville (W. T. Weaver Boulevard)
84
64
-31
Glenn’s Creek Greenway
137
136
-1%
36 /// GAP Plan /
Map 6. City Collected Pedestrian Counts Source: City of Asheville Bike/Ped Task Force
DATA NOTE The City of Asheville’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Task Force coordinates bicycle and pedestrian counts each September. While there is consistency in some locations, not all locations are counted every year. Additionally, the data is not adjusted to reflect weather and other variables. Therefore, the counts presented here represent the highest recorded count for the reporting period, 2016 - 2020.
/
GAP Plan
/// 37
Long-Duration Pedestrian Counts
Relevant Local, Regional and State Plans
The French Broad River MPO has count equipment that is capable of collecting week-long count data for people moving along sidewalks and greenways. Since 2014, the MPO has placed this equipment at various locations in Asheville. Of the MPO’s dataset, there are two locations with repeated data collection: downtown on Biltmore Ave (west side of the street, approximately 150-feet south of Patton Ave) and West Asheville on Haywood Road (north side of the street between Vermont and Herron Aves). Although this data collection was repeated within 6-months, and is therefore not ideal for annual comparisons, it does provide an understanding of overall volume and peak usage. Not surprisingly, in both locations the peak number of people walking was Saturday afternoon in December and Saturday evening in May). The equipment that collects this data does not differentiate by user type so in some cases the user may have been a person on a bike, on the sidewalk.
As a part of the Asheville Close the GAP Project, relevant planning documents have been reviewed and summarized. The purpose of this exercise is to ensure any recommendations that are developed from this plan are consistent with precedent, and to help establish vision and goals as Close the GAP advances. The plan review was limited to sections that related to pedestrian, ADA and greenway facilities within the City. In the Appendix, the full review of local, regional and state plans is provided. The plans pertaining directly to Asheville are shown in Figure 8 The City of Asheville and other partners have a wide variety of planning documents to guide pedestrian, ADA and greenway related decisions. Through the Close the GAP planning process, the City is presented with a prime opportunity to integrate the ideas and policies from previous studies into this project; the City also can bring forth new ideas and update concepts and policy documents.
The findings for these two locations are provided in Table 4 and the Appendix offers the data for all sites collected by the MPO).
Table 4. Weekly Number of People Walking in Downtown and West Asheville, 2014-2015 (Source: FBRMPO)
Biltmore Avenue
Haywood Road
Dec 2 - 9, 2014 (Tues-Tues)
May 29 - June 5, 2015 (Fri-Fri)
Dec 12 - 19, 2014 (Fri-Fri)
May 21 - 28, 2015 (Thus-Thus)
Total Users (Count)
27,200
35,474
8,881
9,407
Average Users/Hour
162
211
53
56
Peak 2-Hour Count
1,393 (2-4 p.m., Saturday Dec 6)
1,750 (8-10 p.m., Saturday May 30)
362 (1-3 p.m., Saturday Dec 13)
370 (8-10 p.m., Saturday May 23)
38 /// GAP Plan /
1992
2003
ADA Transition Plan
2009
2005
2008
Wilma Dykeman Riverway Master Plan
Pedestrian Plan
Comprehensive Bicycle Plan
2010
2013
2015
Parks, Recreation, Cultural Arts & Greenway Master Plan
Shiloh Community Plan 2025
Greenway Master Plan
Neighborhood Sidewalk Polciy
2016
2018
2018
2018
Asheville in Motion Mobility Plan
Burton Street Neighborhood Plan
Living Asheville & Neighborhood Plans on a Page
Transit Master Plan
2019
Swannanoa River Greenway Corridor & Feasibility Study
2021
Tunnel Road Corridor Study
2019
2020
Greenway Connector Project
Downtown Master Plan Update: Public Space Management
2021
2021
Biltmore Avenue & McDowell Street Corridor Study
Advancing Racial Equity in Asheville
2021
Hendersonville Road Corridor Study
Figure 8. Previous City of Asheville Planning Documents Reviewed for Close the GAP (Note: County and MPO Plans Were Also Reviewed and Findings Can Be Found in the Appendix).
/
GAP Plan
/// 39
Chapter 2 Endnotes 1 French Broad River MPO. (2020). Metropolitan Transportation Plan: 2045 Our Path to the Future. http://frenchbroadrivermpo.org/wp-content/ uploads/2020/07/MTP_2045_Web.pdf 2 U.S. Census Bureau (2010 and 2018). American Community Survey 5-year estimates. [Data set]. https://data.census.gov 3 French Broad River MPO. (2020). Metropolitan Transportation Plan: 2045 Our Path to the Future. http://frenchbroadrivermpo.org/wp-content/ uploads/2020/07/MTP_2045_Web.pdf 4 French Broad River MPO. (2020). Metropolitan Transportation Plan: 2045 Our Path to the Future. http://frenchbroadrivermpo.org/wp-content/ uploads/2020/07/MTP_2045_Web.pdf 5 Center for Neighborhood Technology. (2020, December 30). Welcome to the H+T Affordability Index. https://htaindex.cnt.org/ 6 U.S. Census Bureau (2018). Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics. Retrieved from [https://onthemap.ces.census.gov/]. 7 U.S. Census Bureau (2002). Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics. Retrieved from [https://onthemap.ces.census.gov/]. 8 Marshall, W. E., Piatkowski, D., & Johnson, A. (2017). Scofflaw bicycling: Illegal but rational. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 10(1). https://doi. org/10.5198/jtlu.2017.871 9 Wachtel, A., & Lewiston, D. (1994). Risk Factors for Bicycle-Motor Vehicle Collisions at Intersections *. Ite Journal-institute of Transportation Engineers, 64, 30-35. 10 Jaffe, E. (2014, August 14). Tired of Cyclists Riding on the Sidewalk? Build More Bike Lanes. Bloomberg.com. Retrieved September 15, 2021, from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-08-14/tired-of-cyclists-riding-on-the-sidewalk-build-more-bike-lanes. 11 Sadik-Khan, Janette. (2011 October 11). [PowerPoint Slides]. New York City Department of Transportation. http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/ pdf/2011_columbus_assessment.pdf. 12 Wesley E. Marshall, Nicholas N. Ferenchak. (2019). Why cities with high bicycling rates are safer for all road users. Journal of Transport & Health. DOI: 10.1016/j.jth.2019.03.004. 13 NCDOT Traffic Safety Unit. (2021). NCBikePedCrashes. [Data set]. North Carolina Department of Transportation. https://ncdot.maps.arcgis.com/ home/item.html?id=2a18016d2f1c469cb2edf5cc53e36f32.
40 /// GAP Plan /
3
THE COMMUNITY VOICE
“
Disabled voices should be highlighted, as disabled people have much greater awareness of what is currently lacking in our community.” - East Asheville Resident
42 /// GAP Plan /
3
THE COMMUNIT Y VOICE Community engagement made this document possible. Preferences and project ideas were identified by residents, community members, visitors and local interest groups. While COVID-19 limited the amount of face-to-face interaction, the team was able to work through limitations and shift the approach to achieve broad feedback and engagement. This chapter describes the timeline for all of the engagement activities and the purpose of each; full details on the meetings are provided in the Plan Appendix 4.
CO RE EN G AG E ME NT S TR ATEGY Coalescing the community vision for a three-part plan in a diverse urban environment necessitated guidance from a core group of individuals throughout this 2.5year project. This core engagement strategy took the form of several stakeholder groups described in this section. Specific individuals in each group are listed in the Appendix.
A NOT E ABOU T COVID-19 Like many people that encountered the COVID-19 Pandemic, the Close the GAP project team was challenged to rethink the engagement that is so integral to a project like this. With a seven-year-old Greenway Master Plan, no dedicated ADA Transition Plan for Public Rights-of-Way, and a fifteen-year-old Pedestrian Plan, Asheville was in need of guidance on projects and policies to realize its visions for a walkable community. And yet, on March 11, 2020, when COVID-19 was declared a global pandemic, Close the GAP had not yet launched broad community engagement and only hosted a few small, in-person, engagement events. The overall pandemic engagement strategy was to transition meetings and surveys to a virtual format, target overlooked or underrepresented voices, lean on community partners for help, launch a social media campaign and, where feasible, go to communities for in-person gatherings. The team was dedicated to ensuring that Close the GAP would represent the voice of Asheville despite the limitations posed by a pandemic.
/
GAP Plan
/// 43
PROJECT TIMELINE
TTT Meeting #1
DEC 18
2020
KICK-OFF PHASE OCT ‘19 - MAR ‘20
TECHNICAL PROVIDER ENGAGEMENT
Start of Community Survey & Marketing Campaign
OCT 30
GAP at Pumpkin Pedaller
OCT 31
Greenway Intercept Survey #1
AUG 10
Greenway Intercept Survey #2
AUG 14
Public Meeting #1 (Virtual) & Start of Project Network Survey
AUG 25
JAN 23
CAC Meeting #1
JAN 27
CAC Drop-In Meeting
AVL UNPAVED ALLIANCE MEETINGS
INFORMATION GATHERING Apr ‘20 - Aug ‘21
Public Meeting #1 (Virtual)
2021
AUG 27
MAR 23
CAC Meeting #2
SEP 14
ADA Focus Group Meeting #1
SEP 16
ADA Focus Group Meeting #2
JAN 20
Start Stakeholder Outreach (NCDOT, COA Committees / Commissions)
APR 22
Start Community Review of Draft Plan
SEP 11
End Community Review of Draft Plan
GAP IDENTIFICATION & NETWORK CONFIRMATION Aug ‘21 - Feb ‘22
PLAN ADOPTION
Start of Final Community Survey
FEB 21
End of Final Community Survey
MAR 31
Mar ‘22 - Oct ‘22
2022
KEY TTT / Think Tank Team CAC / Citizens Advisory Committee AVL / Asheville ADA / Americans with Disabilities Act
44 /// GAP Plan /
Projected Council Adoption Date
OCT 11
Think Tank Team (TTT) Close the GAP is one of Asheville’s largest multimodal planning efforts, spanning multiple City departments, Buncombe County staff, and other outside agencies, such as NCDOT. Given the impact that this plan will have on a broad range of City policies, projects and departments, the planning effort convened a team of technical advisors, known as the Think Tank Team, to steer the project. The individuals on the TTT were subject matter experts who assisted in guiding project development and policies, sharing perspectives, needs and expertise.
Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) The Close the GAP team developed the Citizens Advisory Committee to serve as an initial touchpoint in engagement activities. The individuals on the CAC represented an organization, neighborhood or interest group and brought forth their ideas in this smaller setting. CAC members acted as liaisons to the community voice, in idea generation and in promotion of GAP activities.
ADA Focus Group Close the GAP was also guided by a group of individuals with disabilities or representing those with disabilities. The ADA Focus Group provided input on
11
areas that needed better access, on prioritization for investment and review of accessibility recommendations.
Asheville Unpaved Alliance The Asheville Unpaved Alliance was built around the desire of many to implement a natural surface trail system within the City. While the City is supporting the effort, the hope is that it will grow to be a community initiative led by many organizations that have expertise in trail building, maintenance, volunteer recruitment, grant writing, and more. The group contains a broad spectrum of members from County and City parks and recreation staff, mountain bike and bicycle advocacy groups, trail running clubs, campus representatives (AB Tech and UNCA), and others. As part of this planning process, early facilitation helped the Alliance get off the ground. Since summer of 2021, the Alliance has been meeting on its own, led largely by the City, Asheville on Bikes, and Pisgah SORBA, to advance the goals and projects that were identified early on. The Asheville Unpaved Guidebook (found in the Accompanying Documents) was developed as a document to support and formalize the group’s alliance agreements, identify projects, define trail standards, strategize potential policy and structure how the Alliance works with the City.
12
Image 11 / The First Meeting of the Think Tank Team in December 2019. Image 12 / The First Meeting of the Community Advisory Committee in January 2020.
/
GAP Plan
/// 45
“Asheville is an extremely difficult city to navigate using a wheelchair (especially manual), not only due to the steep and hilly terrain but also due to the deteriorating and pre-ADA pedestrian infrastructure and lack of inclusive accessibility in many places.” - Asheville Resident
46 /// GAP Plan /
TARGETED WO R K S E S S IO NS The Close the GAP team hosted work sessions with several City departments and external agencies to discuss the following topics as it relates to walking needs and the ADA: resources and planning, recommendations, policy and implementation. The goal of these sessions was to close the gap between existing and needed resources and methods, to gather feedback on recommendations, and to map the course for implementation. The following agencies were interviewed throughout the planning effort; unless otherwise indicated, the agency represents City of Asheville departments: • Transportation Department • Public Works Department • Legal and City Manager’s Office • Planning and Urban Design Department • Development Services Department • Capital Projects Department • NCDOT • Buncombe County • Blue Ridge Southern Railroad • US Access Board
C IT Y TA SK FO RC E & CO M M IS S IO N P RES EN TAT IO NS The GAP team presented project updates for feedback from the Multimodal Transportation Commission and the Greenway Committee. These presentations took place during the information gathering and network confirmation phases.
CO M M U N I T Y S UR V E Y S
questions and the other was targeted to those with a disability or someone representing a person with a disability. General GAP Survey See Figure 9 for an overview of results. • There were nearly 1,570 responses to the GAP general survey with 4,259 written comments. The demographics of the respondents generally reflects that of the City. • We asked survey-takers to share what they would do if they were in charge of the City’s greenway and pedestrian programs. Top ranked responses included connecting major greenways, adding more sidewalks, and more neighborhood connections. • Respondents didn’t have a strong preference for the type of facility they would like to see - what they really wanted were more and better connections. • Survey-takers wanted to feel safer at intersections than they currently did. • Respondents liked direct and complete connections and did not like gaps where there was no sidewalk or greenway. • Survey-takers expressed a willingness for a small property tax increase to fund pedestrian and greenway projects; generally, around 1.5 pennies was acceptable. Map 7 illustrates a map of Asheville indicating areas of the City’s and streets that had a greater number of mentions in comments. Generally, arterial streets were mentioned more frequently for their pedestrian needs. The top 10 streets that received some type of comment include, either in a positive or negative context, include: 1. Merrimon Avenue 2. Kimberly Avenue 3. Broadway Avenue 4. Lexington Avenue 5. Tunnel Road
Three survey types were developed for the Close the GAP project. These vary from online to in-person and are described here.
6. Biltmore Avenue
Broad Community Feedback Survey
9. Beaverdam Road
During the information gathering phase of Close the GAP, two surveys were released concurrently, asking people about current and desired states of walking and rolling in Asheville. One survey asked general
10. Cumberland Avenue
7. Haywood Road 8. Lyman Avenue
/
GAP Plan
/// 47
Figure 9. General Gap Survey Results Budget Prioritization
Who Took the Survey?
If you were in charge of Asheville’s pedestrian and greenway programs and budget, which of the following efforts would you prioritize to make walking and greenway use more convenient, safe and well connected.
1,570 Participants / 93,000 (1.7% of population)
Connect the major greenways that can get
75% us across the City (greenway network)
4,259 Comments
67% Add missing sidewalks
89% White / 83% White in City
Add more neighborhood greenway
59% connections 54% Female / 52.2% Female in City
42% Connect sidewalks & greenways to transit 87% Not Hispanic, Latino/a/x or Spanish / 77.9% in City
Address speeding traffic
41% (e.g. traffic calming)
Preference for Separated Facilites How likely are you to use the following greenway or greenway connector types for recreation and transportation needs?
Traditional Asphalt or Concrete Greenway
Not Very Likely
Very Likely
Not Very Likely
Very Likely
Traditional Greenway with Natural Surface Shoulder Sidewaks with Bike Lane Sidewalks with Buffered Bike Lane Sidewalks with Bicycle Boulevard Shared Streets Designated Roadway Shoulders Combo Sidewalks with Cycletrack Multiuse Sidepath
Pedestrian Intersection Experiences Select the top factors that make a street crossing difficult at locations with and without traffic lights
83%
People in cars (turning) who don’t stop/yield at unsignalized locations
81%
Locations unsafe because people driving travel too fast, too few breaks in traffic
77%
People in cars (turning) who don’t stop/yield at signalized locations
48 /// GAP Plan /
Preference for Separated Facilities How willing would you be to pay a small increase in property tax to fund projects? How much of an increase would you support?
Not Willing
Very Willing
No Pennies
Two Pennies
Walking Experiences A direct & complete sidewalk route defines their favorite walking street.
68%
79%
A missing sidewalk or significant gaps defines difficult routes.
Map 7. Streets Mentioned in Close the GAP Surveys Source: Close the GAP Survey Results
/
GAP Plan
/// 49
ADA Survey Here is an overview of the survey results: • There were 251 responses to the ADA survey, 451 written comments. The demographics of those who responded generally align with those characteristics of Asheville residents.
People with disabilities most valued the following infrastructure in their transportation network: onstreet parking, sidewalks, access to bus stops, street crossings and curb ramps. Priority areas for improvement included parks, libraries and community centers; grocery stores and shopping centers; and transit lines/stops.
• Respondents had a variety of disabilities, largely those that impact their ability to move about the street system. • A large portion of respondents reported using a car when they would have preferred to walk or roll but couldn’t do so because of barriers in the network.
Figure 10. ADA Survey Results Who Took the Survey?
Barriers Are there times when you would like to walk or use a mobility device to reach a destination, but you do not because of barriers?
251 Participants / 10,955 (2.3% of disabled population) Yes and I have a car and can drive to places I cannot walk
451 Comments
5%
80% White / 83% White in City
Yes and I have a reliable transportation option
5%
17.8% 49.5%
No 55% Female / 52.2% Female in City Yes and I use Mountain Mobility 92% Not Hispanic, Latino/a/x or Spanish / 77.9% in City
22.8%
Yes and I use ART
Type of Disability Walking Moving Vision Breathing Cognitive Abilities Other Least Prevalent
50 /// GAP Plan /
Most Prevalent
Intercept Surveys
“Most streets in Asheville only have sidewalks on one side making it necessary for folks in wheelchairs.... to have to cross where there are often no crosswalks.” - Asheville Resident
To meet people where they are walking and wheeling, the Close the GAP team interviewed people as they were using the Reed Creek and Wilma Dykeman Greenways. These surveys, known as ‘intercept’ surveys since they are intended to intercept a user in the midst of their activity, were conducted on August 10 and 14, 2021. The intercept survey asked people about their particular trip and information about what they would be spending in order to arrive at an understanding of the economic impact of greenways. While the full summary of findings is available in Appendix 5, some highlights of the intercept survey include: • 540 surveys; 60% from the River Arts District/ Wilma Dykeman Greenway and 40% from the Reed Creek Greenway • 43% of users walked or bicycled to the greenway; 57% drove to their starting location. • The primary activity of trail users was walking (54%), followed by running (26%), and bicycling (18%), and 2% other. • The median time spent on the trail was 65 minutes.
13
14
Image 13 / Chalk Art Advertising the Greenway Intercept Survey in the River Arts District. Image 14 / Linda Glitz with Connect Buncombe Interviewing a Woman in the River Arts District.
/
GAP Plan
/// 51
Project Network Survey An online survey was hosted from August 25 - October 31, 2021 to collect community input on a draft network of recommendations for walking and greenway needs. A series of maps proposed a citywide network of sidewalk repairs, ADA upgrades, completion of missing sidewalk sections and greenway links. The survey asked users to share what streets they felt were overlooked, to rank key greenway segments, and to share any remaining feedback. This survey was promoted through the City’s Communications and Public Engagement Department through the neighborhood newsletter, Nextdoor, and social media. Staff and the project team presented the survey to the following committees of the City: Neighborhood Advisory Committee, Multimodal Transportation committee and the Legacy Neighbors Meeting. Additionally, City staff led targeted outreach to the following neighborhoods at this intermediate stage of the project: Shiloh, Burton St, Southside, East End and Emma. Posters were put on display at the following Community Centers: Linwood Crump Shiloh Community Center, Stephens-Lee Recreation Center, Burton Street Community Center, Arthur R. Edington Education & Career Center, Dr. Wesley Grant Sr. Southside Community Center, West Asheville Public Library, Oakley/South Asheville Library, East Asheville Public Library, and North Asheville Public Library. A total of 1,164 responses were made to the project network survey site in the time that the survey was open for feedback. Figure 11 describes a demographic summary of the respondents to the survey. There were 170 responses to the pedestrian network map, which resulted in 25 changes or additions to the map. A total of 412 rankings were provided for the greenway network map, which helped prioritize projects. The complete summary Figure 11. Project Network Survey Demographics Summary.
Who Took the Survey? 1,164 Responses
89% White / 83% White in City
59% Female / 52.2% Female in City
79% Not Hispanic, Latino/a/x or Spanish / 77.9% in City
52 /// GAP Plan /
LEGACY NEIGHBORHOODS The Legacy Neighborhoods Coalition’s membership is comprised of neighborhoods that have historically faced racially discriminatory practices, including Urban Renewal and Redlining. These neighborhoods also face current displacement due to nationally ranked levels of gentrification and an absence of local government employing community-led antidisplacement strategies in policies and practice. Asheville Buncombe Community Land Trust, Burton Street Community Association, East End/ Valley Street Neighborhood Association, PODER Emma Community Ownership, Shiloh Community Association, and Southside Rising are working together to ensure community-led development in their neighborhoods, prevent harmful development, and find solutions that support legacy residents to remain in their neighborhoods. (Source: Buncombe County)
of findings on this survey are in the Accompanying Documents: ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan.
Final Community Opinion Survey On February 21, 2022, the final set of project recommendations was shared with the community to collect feedback. This survey closed on March 21, 2022 and in that time, 4,216 responses and 471 comments were collected..
1
Woodfin
Map 8. Legacy Neighborhoods
Mile
Beaver Lake
Source: City of Asheville & Buncombe County
NORTH
26
Emma
240
Burton Street
East End/Valley Street Southside Area
240
40
40
40
Shiloh
Biltmore Estate
Biltmore Forest
26
DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE LEGACY NEIGHBORHOODS Burton Street Emma Lake Julian
South French Broad
Shiloh Southside Area
LeeWalker Heights
East End/Valley Street Downtown Asheville City of Asheville Area Cities
Southside Erskine-Walton
Livingston Heights
AVL Regional Airport
0.5
Fletcher
Mills River
Miles
/
GAP Plan
/// 53
Figure 12. Additional Engagement Strategies Including StoryMaps, Online Surveys, and Social Media Promotional Materials.
P U B L IC M E E T I NG S The Close the GAP team hosted two virtual public meetings. The purpose of the first set of meetings was to describe the priority pedestrian and greenway network and gather feedback; these were hosted on August 25, 2021 (6-7:30 p.m.) and August 27, 2021 (10-11:30 a.m.). Following this series of meetings, City staff hosted a roadshow where they visited neighborhood organizations and further facilitated feedback. Included in this first Public Meeting was an explanation of the Project Network Survey.
P H OTO & V I DEO C A MPA IG N Thanks to a grant from Connect Buncombe, City staff was able to hire a photographer and videographer to tell the story of Close the GAP. The photos and videos, representing diverse faces and voices of Asheville, share the many ways that it is both easy and challenging to move around the City. These tools were used to engage people across Asheville in Close the
54 /// GAP Plan /
GAP. The photos were used to develop social media imagery (Facebook and Instagram), posters, website imagery and targeted advertising (Urban News).
AD DI T IONAL ENG AG EMEN T ST R AT EG I ES To reach further into the community, the TPD team developed several resources that are illustrated in Figure 12. These video and digital media include StoryMaps for Close the GAP and Asheville Unpaved and a Community Overview on YouTube in English and Spanish. These tools were promoted online but also used when in-person events were allowed. In these in-person meetings, the tools were provided as a presentation and follow up item. Additionally, the team expanded outreach through community e-newsletter posts and targeted outreach to specific organizations in the City.
4
HOW WE GOT HERE
“
I don't really love walking streets here because sidewalks are narrow, if we have them at all.” - West Asheville Resident
4
H OW W E G OT HERE
Destination + Equity
+
In this chapter, we review the steps the team took to arrive at project recommendations. This process began with a technical analysis that included several community engagement touchpoints before arriving at the final recommendations as described in Chapters 5, 6 and 7 for the Greenway, ADA and Pedestrian Plans, respectively.
Figure 13. The Following Three Factors Guided the Creation of Projects for Close the Gap.
TH E B IRT H O F A PRO J EC T
As such, it is important to rank projects so that the City can focus limited resources on key projects in order to achieve the goals and vision set out at the beginning of this plan. To rank projects, Close the GAP focuses on three key factors as illustrated in Figure 13: destination + equity, connectivity and safety. These three factors were used to rank projects based on the corridor approach, as described in the following.
Safety
+
Much of the community’s feedback gathered during this project took the form of a project idea or recommendation, such as a desire for a sidewalk connection on a particular street. In a plan like Close the GAP, which covers pedestrian, ADA and greenway needs, at the scale of a City like Asheville - the result is a long list of possible project ideas. Although all projects identified in this plan are important, the City simply does not have the resources to complete the entire vision in the near term.
Connectivity
/
GAP Plan
/// 57
CORRID O R A PPROAC H The “corridor approach” is an effort to upgrade all pedestrian facilities in the public right-of-way by developing projects to address sections of public corridors, such as greenways or streets with sidewalks, in an organized fashion. Project development for all three plans was based on the prioritization methodology described in this chapter. Chapters 5, 6 and 7 explain how these corridor scores were utilized to develop project lists for Greenway, ADA and Pedestrian projects. For more information on how this process fits together, see the flowchart on page 70 at the end of this chapter. A corridor, which can be a sidewalk or greenway section, is defined by the roadway or greenway beginning and end points as shown in the project lists and maps. Not all existing roadway corridors (or segments) in the City are on the priority list; however all existing pedestrian facilities are in the ADA Transition plan. Additional details on the ADA Transition Plan are included in Chapter 6 and the Accompanying Document: ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan.
Destination + Equity Score The goal of the destination + equity score was to identify the essential places that people need to access and the areas of the City with the greatest equity need. To understand the combined destination + equity score, we first had to score them individually. For the equity component, we wanted to know: Does the corridor provide greater access to a high equity need area? To arrive at that answer, we used data from the U.S. Census (2019 American Community Survey) to score areas of the City known as Block Groups. This is a geographic area designated by the U.S. Census that typically represents between 600 and 3,000 people. Each Block Group received an equity score based on the following values: • Median household income, because people with lower incomes have fewer means to pay for the high costs of transportation such as car ownership (and are therefore more likely to walk or use public transportation). • Percent of the population that is BIPOC,
58 /// GAP Plan /
because people of color in our city have been disproportionately affected by housing and transportation policy. • Percent of the population that is considered living below the poverty, because those affected by poverty are more likely to walk and use public transportation as a primary form of transportation. • Percent of households with no vehicles available to them, because people without vehicles are more likely to rely on walking and public transit for transportation. • Percent of the population above the age of 65, because, as people age, they may be more likely to stop driving a car. • Percent of the population living with a disability, because many people with a disability cannot, or choose not to, drive. • Percent of the population with limited English proficiency, because using transportation systems, particularly driving, is challenging to those with limited English proficiency. These factors are commonly called equity indicators as they can be used to evaluate levels of inequity in the community and measure progress towards a more equitable future. The equity score for each Asheville Census Block Group is illustrated in Map 9. To determine the destination factor value, we wanted to know: Does the corridor provide access to essential services and resources? To arrive at that answer, we identified key destinations (such as grocery stores, schools, homeless shelters, parks - see the Appendix for all destinations considered), developed a score, and assigned that to each corridor in the City. We mapped this information for City-owned and NCDOT-owned roads, but not interstates (as interstates are not accessible to pedestrians). This analysis helped us to understand the places people need to reach and the corridors are illustrated in Map 10. The team then combined the destination and equity scores, as illustrated in Map 11, to identify hot spots for pedestrian needs and guide prioritization efforts.
Map 9. Equity Score Source: U.S. Census, American Community Survey, 2019 5-Year Estimates
/
GAP Plan
/// 59
Map 10. Destination Score Sources: City of Asheville, NCDOT, Google Maps, Buncombe County, Various Sources to Identify Service Locations, Close the GAP Team Analysis
60 /// GAP Plan /
Map 11. Destination and Equity Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis
/
GAP Plan
/// 61
Figure 14. The Five Categories of Pedestrian Connectivity: Primary Spine, Secondary Spine, Major Collector, Minor Collector and Local/Neighborhood Connections.
15
Connectivity Score The goal of the connectivity score was to identify key street links across the City that make walking a viable transportation option. Close the GAP grouped the City’s pedestrian transportation network into five primary categories as illustrated in Figure 11. The streets that received the highest scoring are the pedestrian spines, which immediately connect more people to more destinations. For example, a road like Hendersonville Road in Biltmore Village has a connectivity score of five (5) as it connects more people to destinations. On the other hand, a road like Joyner Avenue has a connectivity score of three (3) as it is a pedestrian collector that connects State Street to Riverview Drive and parallels Amboy Road, which is a primary spine corridor..
Image 15 / Based on Connectivity Scoring, Hendersonville Road Has a Higher Connectivity Score (5) than Joyner Street (3).
62 /// GAP Plan /
1
Woodfin
Map 12. Connectivity Score
Mile
Beaver Lake
Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis
NORTH
26
240 240 40
40
40
Biltmore Estate
Biltmore Forest
26
DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE CONNECTIVITY SCORING 5 - Highest Connectivity Score
240
4
Lake Julian
3 2 1 - Lowest Connectivity Score Downtown Asheville City of Asheville Area Cities
AVL Regional Airport
0.5
Fletcher
Mills River
Miles
/
GAP Plan
/// 63
Safety Score
16
The goal of the safety score was to identify areas in the City where the pedestrian experience is challenged due to safety factors. The safety score was a combination of reported crashes and the following factors that relate to safety: traffic speed, traffic volume and number of traffic lanes. Map 13 illustrates the full safety score results. A corridor would receive an initial score based on the posted speed limit, the amount of traffic on the road (AADT), and the number of traffic lanes. Next, the corridor received extra points based on its pedestrian crash history. The corridor received two additional points if the corridor crash history included a pedestrian crash fatality, or one extra point if there were other recorded pedestrian crashes. The pedestrian crash data was discussed in greater detail in Chapter 2 and is shown in Map 5. For example, a road like Murdock Avenue in North Asheville had the lowest safety score of one (1), as it is a low speed, low volume, and is a two-lane road with no recorded crashes. On the other hand, Patton Avenue in West Asheville received the maximum safety score of seven (7) as it is high speed, with high traffic volume, more than four (4) travel lanes and multiple recorded pedestrian crashes.
Image 16 / Based on Criteria and Rating Methodology, Murdock Ave in North Asheville Had the Lowest Safety Score (1) While Patton Ave Had the Highest Possible Safety Score (7).
64 /// GAP Plan /
Map 13. Safety Score Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis
/
GAP Plan
/// 65
Results Each road segment received an individual destination + equity, safety and connectivity score. The roadway segments were organized into five scoring groups, or tiers, as shown in Map 14 and described in Figure 15. Tiers The tiers used to group projects are illustrated in Figure 14. Tier 1 represents the highest combination of the connectivity, safety and destination + equity score, while tier 5 is the lowest combined score. An example of a tier 1 corridor is Merrimon Avenue. Merrimon provides direct connection for people walking, it links to essential destinations, and it has a documented history of reported crashes. Edgemont Road is a tier 5 project example since it primarily serves local neighborhood, does not link key destinations and the relative safety concerns are lower.
Future Use of Corridor Scores and Tiers This scoring process was utilized primarily to develop priority corridors groups (tiers) that were advanced into project development for each plan (Greenway, ADA and Pedestrian). However, the scoring results and tiers will be available as a GIS tool for City staff and can be utilized as follows: • Evaluation of corridors that may need to be added to the list in the future. • The scoring categories and final tiers are referenced in Chapter 9 and are recommended to be referenced when updating the Asheville Standards Specification and Details Manual (ASSDM). For example, for roadways with higher safety scores, it is more important to provide sidewalks on both sides of the road with greater separation from traffic.
All projects take time, and some are very complicated while others are dependent on funding partners like NCDOT. These variables shift project timelines, and as such, it is possible that lower scoring projects will be constructed while we’re still assembling the pieces of a higher scoring corridor. The tiers do not necessarily imply order of implementation or importance, but were used to group the projects into similar categories (or road types), and to aid in overall project development and prioritization as is described further in Chapters 5, 6 and 7.
Figure 15. The Tiers of Projects as Defined by Combined Scores.
Combined Score: Connectivity, Safety, Destination & Equity Tier 1: 13-17 Points
Tier 3: 8-9 Points
Tier 2: 10-12 Points
Tier 4: 7 Points
66 /// GAP Plan /
Tier 5: 0-6 Points
1
Woodfin
Map 14. Total Score by Tier Groups
Mile
Beaver Lake
Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis
NORTH
26
240 240 40
40
40
Biltmore Estate
Biltmore Forest
26
DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE DES, SAFETY & CONNECTIVITY TIER GROUPING
240
Tier 1 Lake Julian
Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 5 Downtown Asheville City of Asheville Area Cities
AVL Regional Airport
0.5
Fletcher
Mills River
Miles
/
GAP Plan
/// 67
17
18
Image 17 / Recommendations for Brevard Road in West Asheville Include ADA Upgrades to the Existing Sidewalk and a New Sidewalk on the Other Side of the Street. Image 18 / Hendersonville Road Corridor Study Rendering Showing a Planned Multi-use Sidepath With the Existing Sidewalk on the Other Side of the Street.
P RO JEC T CAT EG O R I E S PL AN ID EN TIF IC AT IO N Once each corridor was scored and reviewed, corridors were further divided into categories as the following strategy describes:
Assign to a Primary Plan Each roadway segment was assigned to the Greenway Plan (Chapter 5), ADA Transition Plan (Chapter 6) or Pedestrian Plan (Chapter 7). Additional project development discussion and final project lists can be found in these chapters as follows: • Chapter 5 - Greenways Plan: Includes identified greenways, multi-use pathways, and neighborhood greenway corridors. Note that some greenways overlap with roadway corridors. For example, the City and Buncombe County recently sponsored three corridor studies that resulted in multi-use path recommendations which were placed on the greenway project list. For example, the multi-use paths proposed for Hendersonville Road, Tunnel Road, Biltmore Avenue and McDowell Street can be found on the greenway project list. • Chapter 6 - ADA Plan: Roadway corridors with existing sidewalks in need of replacement, repair or maintenance were placed on the ADA Transition Plan. • Chapter 7 - Pedestrian Plan: Roadway corridors with missing sidewalk sections, sidewalk widening
68 /// GAP Plan /
needs and/or crossing enhancement needs were placed in the Pedestrian Plan (the pedestrian plan project list). Some corridors were placed on multiple lists. A few examples of this are projects that: • Have both existing sidewalk sections, which were placed on the ADA Transition Plan, and sidewalk gaps, which were placed on the Pedestrian Plan. An example of this is Brevard Road in West Asheville. As shown in Image 17, there is an existing sidewalk in need of ADA upgrades as well as sidewalk gaps. • Have sidewalk gaps on one side, which would result in a project for the Pedestrian Plan, and a planned multiuse sidepath on the other side of the road, which would result in a project on the Greenway Plan. An example of this is Hendersonville Road in South Asheville. As shown in Image 18, this rendering from the Hendersonville Road Corridor Study shows the planned multiuse sidepath on one side with an existing sidewalk on the other side.
H OW I T AL L COMES TOG ET HER Network Confirmation Once projects were assigned to a plan (Greenway, ADA, or Pedestrian) the next step was a public feedback point to confirm that critical connections
were all identified prior to moving to specific project recommendations. In order to confirm the priority pedestrian corridors (roadway segments) and get input on greenway connections, a second round of online public engagement was initiated in August of 2021. These results are integrated into the following Greenway, ADA and Pedestrian Plans.
Project Development & Recommendations After the network was confirmed through public feedback, detailed project specifics were developed and are discussed in each chapter. These details include: • Existing conditions review and connection needs • Recommendations • Current funding status (if applicable) • Next steps for implementation • Partnerships required, if applicable, e.g., NCDOT, Buncombe County etc. In addition, an overview of Recommendations for Project Development (Chapter 9) and Policy Review and Recommendations (Chapter 10) apply to all three plans. The flow chart on page 70 shows how this process all comes together.
/
GAP Plan
/// 69
Destination and Equity Scores (Areas in Greatest Need for Connectivity)
Chapter 4
Greenway System Gap & Off Road Connection is Feasible
Sidewalk Network Priorities (Includes Safety & Connectivity Scores)
(Chapter 6)
(Chapter 6)
Existing Pedestrian Facility Needs ADA Upgrades
New Sidewalk & Crossings Needed
Greenway Plan
ADA Transition Plan for Public Right-of-Way
Pedestrian Plan
(Chapter 6)
(Chapter 7)
(Chapter 8)
Confirmation and Public Feedback August & September 2021
Recommendations & Project Lists* (Chapter 6, 7 & 8)
Project Development & Next Steps (Chapter 9)
Design Standards & Policy Recommendations (Chapter 10)
Take Action (Chapter 11)
*Before reviewing the recommendations in the following Chapters, it is helpful to understand some terminology, and understand how NCDOT and the City develop and maintain facilities. Since these items are referenced repeatedly throughout the following chapters, please find some basics on the following pages.
70 /// GAP Plan /
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
/
GAP Plan
/// 71
Quick Sheets #4:
Things to Know About Prioritizing and Funding for Projects Before the Design What you need to know about roadway maintenance and funding requirements All publicly owned roads, with a few exceptions, are maintained by either NCDOT or the City of Asheville. NCDOT has maintenance responsibility for Interstates (I-240), US Highways (US 25 / Hendersonville Road), NC Highways (NC 81 / Swannanoa River Road), and Secondary Roads (SR-3556 / Amboy Road). High scoring corridors maintained by NCDOT were placed on the NCDOT Priority Corridor Lists for the ADA and Pedestrian recommendations. This will aid the City and NCDOT in their project development prioritization and to develop projects that meet their requirements and priorities. These corridors also have funding partnership opportunities that differ from City of Asheville streets. The City and NCDOT have a history of working in partnership to develop projects. For example, NCDOT and the City have a standing monthly meeting to discuss pedestrian safety issues.
Additionally, the City and NCDOT work with regional partners through the FBRMPO to determine other types of projects. The City of Asheville maintains some larger roads, such as Charlotte Street north of I-240 or WT Weaver Boulevard, smaller streets like Livingston Street, and most streets in downtown Asheville. High scoring corridors maintained by the City of Asheville were placed on the City of Asheville’s Priority Corridor Lists for the ADA and Pedestrian recommendations. When developing projects from these lists, the City of Asheville will lead project development. If any of these projects receive state and/or federal transportation funding, they must follow the state project development process. In addition, the figure below shows the transportation planning and prioritization process that these projects must follow before project development.
Figure 16. Transportation Planning Process: Pre-design Steps for State and Federally Funded Projects.
COMP PLAN
MTP1
SPOT2
TIP3
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
Identify local vision and needs
Identify region’s long range project plan
Identify region’s top projects
Identifty the region’s 10-year funding plan
Develop (construct) Projects
20 - 30 year planning horizon
20 year planning horizon, updated every 5 years
Criteria updated periodically
A 10 year plan that is updated every 2 years
Timing depends on size and scope of project
72 /// GAP Plan /
1. What is an MTP? Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP, previously known as LRTP or Long Range Transportation Plan) The French Broad River Metropolitan Planning Organization (FBRMPO) maintains this fiscallyconstrained and required planning document that reflects planned transportation investments over the next 25 years. It forecasts changes in the region and seeks to identify transportation improvements needed to keep travelers and goods moving smoothly and how to fund those improvements. The plan is multi-modal and identifies investments in roadway, public transportation, bicycle and pedestrian, rail and aviation projects.
2. Spot Prioritization Process NCDOT uses a strategic, data-driven process to develop the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The process involves scoring all roadway, public transportation, bicycle, pedestrian, rail, and aviation projects on a number of criteria. Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), Rural Planning Organizations (RPOs), and the NCDOT Divisions also contribute to the final project score by assigning local priority points to projects.
3. Transportation Improvement Plan A statewide prioritized listing/program of transportation projects covering a period of four years that is consistent with the long-range statewide transportation plan (LRSTP), metropolitan transportation plans (MTPs), and transportation improvement plans (TIPs), and is required for projects to be eligible for funding under title 23 U.S.C. and title 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53.
of overlapping land use, safety and transportation needs that require a detailed study in order to better define a corridor wide improvement plan. A corridor study provides a detailed look at land use and transportation needs, goals and vision as well as a robust public and stakeholder involvement process. The result is a more vetted and customized range of solutions and recommendations that can move into the project development process. When a corridor study is needed, it is typically completed between the MTP and SPOT phase.
When are Feasibility Studies Done For more complex projects, it may be necessary to perform a high level investigation of physical and environmental constraints in order to better define a project scope and cost. This would be completed before a project moves into the final design process. During the feasibility study, key project risks and opportunities are identified and investigated. The evaluation should include items such as: • Environmental features (e.g. wetlands, threatened and endangered species, waterways) • Physical constraints (e.g. steep slopes, buildings and private property impacts) • Right-of-way availability (property ownership or the ability to acquire property for facilities) • Utilities and railroad lines More complex projects may require a detailed feasibility study with more robust data collection in order to clearly define the project scope and budget requirements.
4. When are Corridor Studies Completed? Some of Asheville’s busiest corridors are difficult for pedestrians to navigate; however, the ultimate recommendation is not as simple as adding sidewalks. Some of these roadways have a myriad
/
GAP Plan
/// 73
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
5
GREENWAY (G) PLAN AND RESULTS
“
Greenways, more greenways please. More and more people are walking to destinations instead of driving. We need safe, green spaces to walk through.” - South Asheville Resident
76 /// GAP Plan /
5
G R E E N WAY (G) PLAN AND R E S U LT S
2. Identify new greenway corridors 3. Define and assign new greenway typologies (types) to the network 4. Greenway Network Recommendations and Prioritization
Asheville’s update to the Greenway Plan and recommendations contained within this chapter define desired greenway corridors in Asheville, an approach to prioritizing these projects, and the highest ranked 10 projects that may be advanced in the near-term.
ST EP 1 : REF I NE PRE VIOUSLY PL ANNED G REENWAY AL IG NMENT S
OV ERV IE W
The first step in this effort was to review original greenway corridors as identified in the 2013 plan. These original corridors were either maintained as originally presented, revised, or eliminated if the greenway was identified as infeasible due to land use, right-of-way changes, topography, or other factors.
This plan is an update of the City of Asheville’s 2013 Greenway Master Plan, with a revision to the greenway network. New greenways have been added, refined, or removed. Greenways in the network were then assigned one of three typologies or “types” that better define the greenway’s character and purpose, much like roads have a hierarchical system or functional classification (see glossary). The public has weighed in on the priorities of greenways, which is one factor in final prioritization of the system. Other factors in prioritization include project status (how far along it is), potential for funding, equity, importance to the network, and partnerships that may help get a greenway built. The Destination and Equity scoring (explained in Chapter 4) guided this process to identify areas of need. In summary, this plan chapter is arranged in the following 4 steps:
Reviewing the 2013 Greenway Master Plan For Feasibility
This process included a constraints analysis as depicted in Appendix 8. Two specific corridors, the West Asheville RailTrail Greenway and the Beaverdam Greenway, were assessed in more detail to determine project feasibility. These detailed studies can be found in Appendix 9. Based on the constructability analysis, several greenways had been previously planned but have been determined infeasible and have been removed from the planned greenways list. The greenways that have been removed or altered from the greenway plan are as follows:
1. Refine previously planned greenway alignments, including the 2013 Greenway Master Plan
/ GAP Plan /// 77
• French Broad Greenway West (northernmost section): From Emma Road to Pearson Bridge Road this section was removed after further analysis indicates it is infeasible due to steep grades and exposed bedrock. • Beaverdam Greenway (travelling east of Merrimon Ave.): This greenway was removed as the corridor is very constrained as well as barriers related to small individually owned lots. This route may be considered as a natural surface trail candidate.
ST EP 2: I D ENT I F Y NE W G REENWAY CORRI D ORS Informed by the Destination and Equity Analysis and the constructability analysis, the Close the GAP project team worked with project partners to define the new, expanded planned greenway network. In searching for new greenway alignments to add to the system, a number of items were reviewed:
• Sandhill Road Greenway: A multi-use path proposed along this road was determined to be extremely difficult due to the potential impact to multiple small private lots, even if part of a road widening project.
• New Road Corridor Projects with Proposed Greenways: Through the State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP), developed with the French Broad River MPO, NCDOT identified roadway projects with complete street elements. See Map 21 for the NCDOT Greenway (Multi-use Paths) Projects City Prioritization Map.
• Hominy Creek Greenway-West: The greenway was realigned to the Pond Road area due to new development patterns which effected the previous alignments feasibility.
• I-26 Connector Greenways: The community identified a major need for connectivity associated with NCDOT’s Interstate 26 widening project. The I-26 area projects are highlighted on Map 21.
Image 19 / The French Broad Greenway Near New Belgium Brewing is an Example of a Spine Greenway (see Defining New Typologies, Image by Equinox).
19
78 /// GAP Plan /
• Areas with Missing Links: The Close the GAP planning process identified areas that lack pedestrian and bicycle facilities, especially in those areas of the City identified as having higher priority based on destinations, equity, connectivity and safety analysis. • Opportunities to Utilize Larger Tracts of Land: Areas of the City with larger parcels or right-of-way were also identified, as it is typically easier to build greenways when fewer landowners are involved. • Opportunities for New On-Road Greenways: A new type of greenway type was identified—an “onstreet” Neighborhood Greenway that can connect the network in a new way. Read more about this in the section Step 3: Defining New Typologies (Types) where we describe a way to guide greenway planning and development in the City. The results of the redefined and expanded planned greenway network are detailed in Maps (15 - 18) and Tables (8-10).
/
GAP Plan
/// 79
S TEP 3 : D E FI NE A ND A S S IGN N E W T Y P O LO G I E S ( T Y PE S ) Just like a road transportation network, a greenway system can have different levels of service and characteristics based on how many people it will serve, if it is a local or regional connection, or if it has corridor constraints that define how wide the greenway can be. This plan identifies a new set of typologies to guide greenway planning and development in the City. In this plan, each greenway has been assigned a typology that defines the experience, width, easement requirements, and other design characteristics. Each greenway is assigned one of the following typologies: Greenway Spines (See Map 16 and Table 8) are major thoroughfares of the City’s pedestrian/bicycle system. This greenway type carries the highest level of service (carrying capacity, or number of people) and design speed (how quickly a user can travel). It also has the greatest level of investment due to its prominence within the system. It has the greatest width (average 12-14’ or more narrow if a parallel bicycle facility can be established), amenity investment, and name recognition. Greenway Spines travel through entire districts of the City, serving as the “highway” of greenways. Arterial Greenways (See Map 17 and Table 9) serve a secondary means that feed all neighborhoods and sectors of the City into the Greenway Spines. This type of greenway has less amenity investment than spines. They would average 10-12’ and generally feed into more major multi-modal transportation routes (like bus routes or bike lanes) and Greenway Spines.
80 /// GAP Plan /
Imagine an existing neighborhood street that is comfortable enough for a child to bike on as they might on a Greenway Spine: that is a Neighborhood Greenway (See Map 18 and Table 10). This is a new typology to Asheville, and it involves transforming a street to make it more bicycle and pedestrian friendly through enhancements such as intersection features that calm traffic and prioritize access for people walking and biking; wayfinding signage; and branding. Locations for on-street Neighborhood Greenways were selected if they met criteria of having low volume, low speeds, existing traffic calming measures or potential to incorporate traffic calming, and existing or potential for sidewalks. Constructing Neighborhood Greenways with low-cost temporary measures, such as flexible delineators, paint and temporary curbing could serve as an interim measure to determine neighborhood sentiment before a permanent investment is made. Further traffic studies and engineering may be needed for specific design elements. Further detail regarding definitions and standard design criteria for these greenway types can be found in Tables 5 - 7.
Figure 17. Asheville’s New Greenway Types, Including Spine Greenways, Arterial Greenways, Neighborhood Greenways and Natural Surface Trails.
/
GAP Plan
/// 81
Table 5. Typology Details - Greenway
Greenways Spines are the major “interstates” of the city’s pedestrian/bicycle system.
Photo courtesy of Equinox
Greenway Spine Typology Definition Greenways Spines are the major “highways” of the city’s pedestrian/ bicycle system. This greenway type carries the highest level of service and has the highest design speed. It also has the highest level of investment due to its prominence within the system, width, amenity investment, and “name recognition.”
User Types All type of users. Major transportation routes to access all part of the city. While transportation is its primary service, it can serve as a destination for out of area users and/ or day-long recreation users.
Standard Width
Surface Tread
14’ wide. Min 10’ and up Asphalt greenway to 14’ in anticipated high surface use corridors where space allows. If this width can not be used, parallel active transportation facility should be considered (ie. sidewalks). Optional gravel/ crushed fines shoulder could be used where width can not be met.
Longitudinal Slope: Less than 5% slope for accessibility/ADA compliance
Shoulders*: 16”min./24” max. turf shoulders. *To increase existing greenway width, a 3-4’ rubberized shoulder can be added.
Temporary Construction Easement As needed by existing topography with all built elements located within the greenway easement.
Drainage/Cross Slope: Proper drainage of the trail should be provided and can include 2% crown or cross slope of the trail with a drainage ditch or swale on the inside portion of the trail. 2% in-slope or out-slope can also be used to provide positive drainage along the trail. Typical swale cross sections, 3:1 side slopes max, 1’ base min. Trees should be offset or cleared 6’ from the greenway swale.
Typical Greenway Easement Width 30’ typical. When along a stream or river, extend the easement to the edge of the water body to promote conservation If paralleling a road, a reduced easement may be used.
Level of Service/ Design Speed Major transportation routes, user travel speed and level of service is high, requiring design to accommodate via radii and other means.
Additional Notes Centerline striping of the greenway to address high user volumes may be appropriate. Striping should be used on tight or blind corners, near intersections and under bridges, and other areas where the trail may be confined.
Amenities: High Level of Amenities and Wayfinding Lighting: Lighting will be used on Spine Greenways. Lighting of high traffic areas, intersections with roads, and areas with low visibility are priority. Signage: Once a significant amount of miles are intact, install mile markers for wayfinding and to direct emergency response. Gateway/trailhead signage should be prominent with branded trail names. Trailheads or Nodes Along the Trail: Entrance sign, 5+ parking stalls, dog waste station, trash receptacles, wayfinding map, seating, etc.
82 /// GAP Plan /
Figure 18. Greenway Spine Typology
Greenway Spine Typology
SEE NOTE*
SEE NOTE* *TO EXPAND WIDTH OF EXISTING GREENWAYS, A 3-4’ RUBBERZIED PATHWAY CAN BE ADDED THAT SHOULD BE FLUSH WITH EXISTING GREENWAY
/
GAP Plan
/// 83
Table 6. Typology Details - Arterial Greenways
Arterial Greenways connect neighborhoods to the Greenway Spines.
Arterial Spine Typology Definition
Standard Width
Arterial Greenways serve as a secondary means that feed all neighborhoods and sectors of the City into the greenway spines. They can be used as transportation to access other parts of the City, but also serve as local neighborhood recreation amenities.
12’, where possible, 10’ in constrained areas, down to 8’ in highly constrained short stretches. The greenway could alternatively be a 1012’ sidewalk. Shoulders: 16”Min./24” Max. (Unless a sidepath).
Temporary Construction Easement
User Types Intended for all user types, but especially for shorter transportation routes to connect to greenway spines, or quick access to recreation.
As needed by existing topography with all built elements located within the Greenway Easement.
Surface Tread Asphalt Greenway Surface Alternative Surface Types: These trails can also serve as sidepaths and located where future sidewalks will be installed. Temporary surfaces prior to concrete sidewalks can be constructed as nonpaved crushed stone trails (with proper stormwater management) with a gravel top coated with 3” of smaller angular gravel or crushed fines. Arterial Greenways can also be widened sidewalks (10’) where necessary.
Typical Greenway Easement Width 30’ typical. When along a stream or river, extend the easement to the edge of the water body to promote conservation. If paralleling a road, a reduced easement may be used.
Longitudinal Slope: Less than 5% slope for accessibility/ADA compliance
Drainage/Cross Slope: Proper drainage of the trail should be provided and can include 2% crown or cross slope of the trail with a drainage ditch or swale on the inside portion of the trail. 2% in-slope or out-slope can also be used to provide positive drainage along the trail. Typical swale cross sections, 3:1 side slopes max, 1’ base min. Trees should be offset or cleared 6’ from the greenway swale.
Level of Service/Design Speed Secondary transportation routes, travel speed and level of service is moderate, with a somewhat lower design speed and level of service than the Greenway Spines
Additional Notes Centerline striping of the greenway to address high user volumes may be appropriate. Striping should be used on tight or blind corners, near intersections and under bridges, and other areas where the trail may be restricted or confined.
Amenities: Medium/Low (wayfinding, regulatory, and etiquette signage) Lighting: Lighting is preferred on Arterial Greenways and should be prioritized at intersections, trailheads, at underpasses or to light areas that are enclosed by dense vegetation or topography and not visible from a nearby road, homes or active use area. Signage: Mile marker wayfinding. Wayfinding signage where the greenway intersects with major roads or serve as neighborhood trailheads Trailheads or Nodes Along the Trail: Small trailhead with 2-5 parking stalls, including accessible parking.
84 /// GAP Plan /
Figure 19. Arterial Spine Typology
Arterial Spine Typology
/
GAP Plan
/// 85
Table 7. Typology Details - Neighborhood Greenways
Neighborhood Greenways transform an existing street to make it more bicycle and pedestrian friendly.
Neighborhood Greenway Definition Redesign of an existing neighborhood street to make it more pedestrian and bicycle friendly. A suite of design options contribute to these facilities and slow traffic for safer and more comfortable use.
User Types
Suite of Design Solutions to Develop Neighborhood Greenways
Users Prioritized
Ensure that these streets are prioritized for people walking and biking.
Traffic Calming
Traffic calming measures implemented to maintain low speeds or divert traffic
Intersection Improvements
Wayfinding
Improve crossings, especially of busy streets, to enable people of all abilities to more easily cross the street.
Consistent signage throughout each route, with branded neighborhood greenways signs.
People who desire to travel on enhanced neighborhood streets and other users who want to connect to Arterial, Spine Greenways, and other multi-modal routes.
Additional neighborhood greenway traffic speed and volume management elements are shown in the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide under Bicycle Boulevards: https://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/bicycle-boulevards/
Amenities: Low (wayfinding, regulatory, and etiquette signage) Lighting: Lighting considered if new sidewalks are proposed. Consider signal treatments for crossing busier streets. Signage: Signage at intersections. Note that further traffic study and engineering is needed to assess the viability of specific Neighborhood Greenways.
86 /// GAP Plan /
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
/
GAP Plan
/// 87
N ET WO RK RECO M M EN DAT IO NS A ND P RIO RITIZ AT IO N
Figure 20. Next Steps Project Development Definitions Referenced in Tables 8-11.
Planning (Pre-Design)
Network Recommendations The results of the refined and expanded planned greenway network are shown in Map 15.
This phase is required to better define the scope of corridor recommendations to address overlapping land use and transportation needs.
The maps and tables on the following pages show the results broken down in detail for each greenway type. Each typology has its own table with greenways assigned a short-, medium-, and long-term phasing. These tables will be used to assess over time what projects will go onto the City’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP).
Transportation project development involves many steps from preliminary planning through construction. Chapter 8 of this report details the process as well as necessary public input, which is key to integrate at each stage of project development. Some of the greenway projects in this plan are already in development, and their needed “Next Step” to advance the project is noted in Tables 8 - 10. The stages of development referenced in the tables are described in Figure 20.
Ongoing Community Engagement
More on Project Development Next Steps:
Feasibility Study Due to observed corridor constraints, additional feasibility analysis is needed to refine the project limits and details. Preliminary Engineering These projects will require preliminary engineering (30% design) to further evaluate right-of-way needs, constraints and cost.
Design Full construction document to 100% design ROW (Right-of-Way) Securing easements or land
Construction Advertise for construction and build it!
88 /// GAP Plan /
Map 15. Combined Greenway Network Map
1
Woodfin
Mile
Beaver Lake
NORTH
26
240 240 40
40
40
Biltmore Estate
Biltmore Forest
26
GREENWAY NETWORK Existing Spine Greenway Spine Lake Julian
Existing Arterial Coll Arterial Greenway Neighborhood Greenway Buncombe County Planned Greenway Potential Other Greenway Downtown Asheville City of Asheville Area Cities
AVL Regional Airport
Fletcher
Mills River
/ GAP Plan /// 89
1
Woodfin
Map 16. Greenway Spines Map
S2
Mile
Beaver Lake
NORTH
26
S3
S11
240 240
S9 40
S13 S10 S12
S6
S4 40
S8
40
S5
Biltmore Estate
Biltmore Forest
S7
26
SPINE NETWORK Existing Spine Greenway Spine Lake Julian
Downtown Asheville City of Asheville Area Cities
S1
AVL Regional Airport Mills River
90 /// GAP Plan /
Fletcher
Table 8. City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Spine Greenways
City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Greenway Spines Project Phasing Notes (Project in Bold are the City’s Top 10 Projects) Map ID #
Greenway Name
Next Steps
S1
Airport Road Greenway
Planning
S2
Beaverdam Extension
Planning
S3
French Broad River North (NRADTIP)
Project Development Notes Work with county to consider integrating into their future plans Work on Extension as priority to connect lake to Woodfin’s Beaverdam Greenway which, sidepath is landowner contingent
Short Term
Medium Term
Extension: Complete all Preliminary
Long Term
Sidepath TBD
Preliminary This project is funded for design Engineering/ Engineering which should begin in 2022 ROW
Design, ROW and Construction
Preliminary Engineering/ ROW
Design, ROW and Construction
S4
Hominy Creek Greenway (East)
Preliminary Engineering
Contingent on some major landowners, middle section led by County
S5
Hominy Creek Greenway (West)
Landowner contingent
May come sooner, if part of a private development
Landowner contingent
S6
French Broad Greenway (Karen Cragnolin Park)
Preliminary Engineering
RiverLink leading implementation
TBD
Feasibility Study
Based on success with West Asheville Rail-with-Trail, this may follow, highly contingent on railroad company willingness to partner
Preliminary Engineering
TBD-based on NCDOT
TBD-based on NCDOT, currently slated for ROW in 2029
S9
Swannanoa River Greenway East (from Bleachery Blvd. Asheville/County Boundary)
Feasibility Study
Corridor mostly owned by the City. Sections not to be done in conjunction with NCDOT projects could become a higher priority if Fonta Flora State Trail funding for construction becomes available through the State
Feasibility Study, Preliminary Engineering/ ROW, Construction
S10
Swannanoa River East Greenway (From Glendale Ave. to Bleachery Blvd.)
Construction
S11
Tunnel Road Greenway
Planning
S12
West Asheville Railwith-Trail
Feasibility Study
S13
West Asheville Greenway
S7
South Asheville Rail-with-Trail
S8
Swannanoa River West Greenway (NCDOT Implemented sections)
Preliminary Engineering
Feasibility Study
Design, ROW
Construction
Full design soon to be complete Construction and soon to be constructed Done in conjunction with Tunnel Road Corridor and commercial redevelopment Highly contingent on railroad company willingness to partner. Engage Emma and Johnston Blvd neighborhoods Part of I-26 Connector project, constructed by NCDOT
TBD, see the Tunnel Road Corridor Study for more details Feasibility Study, Preliminary Engineering Preliminary Engineering, ROW, Design
Design, ROW, Construction
Construction
/
GAP Plan
/// 91
Map 17. Arterial Greenways Map
92 /// GAP Plan /
Table 9. City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Arterial Greenways
City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Arterial Greenways Project Phasing Notes (Project in Bold are the City’s Top 10 Projects)
Map ID #
Greenway Name
Next Steps
Project Development Notes
TBD
Greenway being analyzed for potential as a natural surface trail
Short Term Medium Term Long Term
A1
Bacoate Branch Greenway
A2
Bartlett Arms Greenway
Planning
A3
Beaucatcher Greenway
Construction
Full design completed with some adjustments, may need more funding
Re-Design, Construction
A4
Beaver Lake Greenway
Planning
Contingent on one major landowner
Feasibility Study
A5
Beverly Hills Greenway
Feasibility Study Complete after Swannanoa Gwy
A6
Biltmore and McDowell Greenway (Options)
Preliminary Eng.
A7
Biltmore Village Connector
Preliminary Eng. Pairs with Sweeten Creek Gwy
A8
Biltmore Village Sidepaths
Preliminary Eng.
A9
Canie Creek Greenway
Preliminary Eng.
A10 Center Street Greenway Ext.
Planning
Id’d by Shiloh neighborhood
A11
Planning
Connects Chunn’s Cove to city
A12
Chunn’s Cove Greenway Deaverview Greenway
Feasibility Study
TBD
TBD
Planning
Part of a transportation corridor study, two options proposed
Remaining Steps
Preliminary Engineering, Design, ROW, Construction ALL
TBD
TBD
ALL Likely to occur with development of property
Feasibility study paired with W. Asheville Rail-with-Trail
ALL TBD
TBD
Feasibility Study
Preliminary engineering, Design,
Preliminary Eng. Required to be unpaved
ALL
Feasibility Study Pair with Jake Rusher Greenway
ALL
A15 Jake Rusher Greenway
Feasibility Study
A16 Lake Julian Greenway
Feasibility Study Project implemented by county, with support from the City of Asheville
A18 Montford Greenway
Planning
Pair with Hendersonville Rd Multi-use path
Contingent on the Lakeview HOA and NCDOT on Merrimon Ave.
Preliminary Eng. Contingent on one landowner
TBD
ALL
A13 Falconhurst Greenway
Merrimon-Beaver Lake Sidepath
TBD
ALL
A14 Hendersonville Rd. Multi-use Path
A17
TBD
ROW, Construction
F
Planning
Feasibility Study, Preliminary Eng.
Design, ROW, Construction
TBD
TBD
TBD
Construction
Project construction will soon be underway
A20 Oakley East Greenway
Planning
Consider studying Oakley South
ALL
A21
Planning
Consider studying Oakley East
ALL
Planning
May be combo of sidewalk/gwy
ALL
A19 Nasty Branch Greenway
Oakley South Greenway
A22 Overlook Road Greenway A23 Ragsdale Creek Greenway A24
Reed Creek Greenway (North & Downtown Extension)
A25 Rhododendron Creek Greenway A26 Schenck Greenway A27 Smith Mill Creek Greenway
Feasibility Study Contingent on landowner outreach. Feasibility Study
Reed Creek North is a Top 10 Project, Downtown Ext. occurs medium-long term
Feasibility Study One section will be design/build Planning
Construction
TBD
TBD
Feasibility Study
All remaining
Design Construction
All Remaining for on Design/ Build Section
TBD
TBD
Feasibility Study Start after I-26 Connector starts
A28 Sweeten Creek Greenway
A30
Pair with S. Asheville Rail-with-Trail and Biltmore Village Connector
A29 Tunnel Road Connector Greenway
A31
Connects East Asheville to Tunnel Rd
TBD
TBD
ALL
TBD
/
Feasibility Study
All Remaining
TBD
TBD
GAP Plan
/// 93
Map 18. Neighborhood Greenways Map
94 /// GAP Plan /
Table 10. City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Neighborhood Greenways
City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Neighborhood Greenways Project Phasing Notes (Project in Bold are the proposed Pilot Projects)
Map ID #
Neighborhood Greenway Name
Project Notes
N01
Beachwood Neighborhood Greenway
Uses Beachwood Road, connects Tunnel Rd Grwy to Swannanoa River Grwy
N02
Beaucatcher Neighborhood Greenway
Connects Kenilworth to Beaucatcher Grwy via Samual Ashe Drive, Reservoir Road, and McCauley Drive
N03
Beaverdam Connector Neighborhood Greenway
Travels Glen Falls Road, Carjen Avenue, and Sareva Plaza, connecting to the lake
N04
Busbee Road Connector Arterial Greenway
Travels Busbee Road
N05
College Street Neighborhood Greenway
Travels College Street up to Beaucatcher Greenway
N06
Downtown Loop - East Neighborhood Grwy
Travels Woodfin Street and South Charlotte Street
N07
Downtown Loop - West Neighborhood Grwy
Travels Coxe Avenue, Clingman, Avenue, and Hill Street
N08
Eastwood Road Neighborhood Greenway
Travels Eastwood Road
N09
Emma East Neighborhood Greenway
Travels Emma Hills Drive and Wren Lane
N10
Emma North-South Neighborhood Greenway
Travels North Louisiana Avenue and Adams Hill Road
N11
Fairway Neighborhood Greenway
Travels Gladstone and Edgewood Roads through Asheville City Golf Course
N12
Haw Creek Neighborhood Greenway
Travels Avon Road and Beverly Road
N13
Hazel Mill Neighborhood Greenway
Travels Hazel Mill Road and North Louisiana Avenue
N14
Kenilworth Neighborhood Greenway
Travels Castle Street, Warwick Road, Kenilworth Road, Aurora Drive, and Beaucatcher Road
N15
Kensington Neighborhood Greenway
Travels Kensington and Fairway Drive along Asheville City Golf Course
N16
Kimberly Neighborhood Greenway
Travels Charlotte Street, Edwin Plaza, to Kimberly Ave north to Beaverdam Road
N17
Lakeshore - West Neighborhood Greenway
Travels Lakeshore Drive from Elkwood Road to Shorewood Drive
N18
Lakeshore - East Neighborhood Greenway
Travels Lakeshore Drive from Shorewood Drive to Graceyln Road, ending at Kimberly Avenue
N19
Lower Grassy Branch Neighborhood Grwy
Travels East Azalea Road, Lower Grassy Branch Road, Miller Branch Road, and Old Farm School Road
N20
Malvern Neighborhood Greenway
Travels Manila Street, Sulpher Springs Road, Mimosa Drive, and Bear Creek Road
N21
Oakley East Off Road Option B Arterial Grwy
Travels Liberty Street, Cedar Street, and Cherrio Lane
N22
Oakley East Neighborhood Greenway
Uses some of Future Drive
N23
Oakley West Neighborhood Greenway
Travels Glendale Avenue and Merchant Street
N24
Oteen Church Neighborhood Greenway
Travels Oteen Church Road, connecting into Azalea Park/Thomas Wolfe Cabin area
N25
Overlook Road Neighborhood Greenway
Connections to Overlook using Deerhaven Lane and Bent Oak Lane
N26
Falconhurst Neighborhood Greenway
Travels Tanglewood Drive, Craggy Avenue, Blue Ridge Avenue, Lanvale Avenue, Olney Road, and Vermont Avenue, connecting Falconhurst Nature Area to West Asheville Park
N27
Richmond Hill Neighborhood Greenway
Travels Richmond Hll Road, Thomas Street, Bingham Road, down Emma Road
N28
River Arts Connector Neighborhood Grwy
Travels Lyman Street, Clingman Avenue, and Depot Streets
N29
Rock Hill Road Neighborhood Greenway
Travels Rock Hill Road, connecting Sweeten Creek Road and Hendersonville Road
N30
Shiloh East-West Neighborhood Greenway
Travles Shiloh Road, Brooklyn Road, Hampton Street, and West Chapel Road
N31
Shiloh North-South Neighborhood Greenway
Travels entirety of Caribou Road from Sweeten Creek Road to Hendersonville Road
N32
South Slope Connector Neighborhood Grwy
Travels Southside Avenue, Short Coxe Avenue, Biltmore Avenue, and Buchanan Avenue
N33
Thompson Street Neighborhood Greenway
Travels entirety of Thompson Street from Biltmore Avenue to Glendale Avenue
N34
UNCA Neighborhood Greenway
Travels Mt Clare Avenue and connects into WT Weaver Boulevard
N35
Weaver Park Neighborhood Greenway
Travels Murdock Avenue, Hillside Street, Madison Avenue, East Chestnut Street, and Central Avenue
N36
West Asheville River Arts Neighborhood Grwy
Connects Patton Avenue down to Craven Street, and along West Haywood Street
N37
Yorkshire Neighborhood Greenway
Travels Yorkshire Street and connects to London Road
/
GAP Plan
/// 95
N EX T S TEP S TO T H E N EIGH B O R H O O D G R E E NWAY P RO GR A M Given that Neighborhood Greenways direct people on bikes and people walking onto mixed traffic streets, further vetting and analysis of the routes and treatments are required for project development. As such, the next steps for implementation include development of a Neighborhood Greenway Plan and Signage Guide and Implementation of a Pilot Program:
Develop a Neighborhood Greenway Plan and Signage Guide A plan would develop more detailed design criteria, a toolbox of treatments with design details, and detailed recommendations for individual projects. It could also develop guidelines for signage and have signage templates ready for the pilot projects. Determine if a project is a good candidate using criteria defined in the Neighborhood Greenway Plan and suggested here. Further vetting and analysis of the feasibility of neighborhood greenway routes is necessary. Detailed traffic analysis is needed to understand feasibility and scope for each project. All projects should be reviewed based on standard criteria defined in the Neighborhood Greenway Plan. Some suggestion for this criteria could include: • Traffic Conditions are Appropriate: On low volume (<3,000 vehicles per day), low speed (<25 miles per hour) streets. • Connects Missing Gaps: Connects gaps in existing pedestrian/bicycle facilities that are unconnected to the larger corridor. Connects to major greenway, pedestrian, or bicycle infrastructure. • Challenging Gaps to Fill: Locations where bicycle/pedestrian facilities (like sidewalks and greenways) are lacking or challenging to build. • Population Connectivity: Connects to dense or more highly populated areas • Equitable: Connects to areas where there is a high equity/destination score. Continues to balance the distribution of investment in neighborhood greenways throughout the City.
96 /// GAP Plan /
• Neighborhood & Community Support: Is supported by the local neighborhood and the larger public supports it as well. • Safety Improvements Needed: There is a need for traffic calming and/or to improve safety issues for pedestrians/bicyclists. • Opportunities Exist: The corridor can accommodate improvements that will greatly increase safety and functionality for pedestrians and bicyclists (traffic calming, separated pedestrian/bicycle facilities, etc.). • Supports Existing Plans & Goals: The improvements are aligned with one or more City or other organization sponsored plans and overall goals. Determine who will lead further design and implementation The design can be done in-house, by consultants, or by a partner; the project can be implemented through temporary materials (e.g., paint and flexible delineators) or by more permanent measures.
NEIG H BORH OOD G REENWAY PI LOT RECOMMENDAT ION S Pilot projects are identified based on the prioritization methodology explained earlier. Pilot projects were also chosen for the size of population and neighborhoods they would serve, for their connectivity to Arterial or Spine Greenways, and are based on balanced distribution across the City. Recommended Pilot Neighborhood Greenway Projects (listed by order of importance): 1. Thompson Street Neighborhood Greenway: This project is the top project as it will serve as an interim connection for the Swannanoa River Greenway before the NCDOT improvements are developed (as part of the project #U-5832). Thompson Street from Biltmore Avenue to Glendale Avenue could ensure that Biltmore Village is connected to East Asheville. 2. Lakeshore Neighborhood Greenway: This project was voted as one of the top priorities by the public. Note that this project can, in sections, serve as a multi-use path with an Arterial Greenway typology but will most likely be designed to be a Neighborhood Greenway where constraints don’t allow for a full multi-use path. Further study is needed to determine the final mix of design and typologies.
20
Image 20 / Street Redesign is a Component of Implementing Neighborhood Greenways. (image by Alyson West)
3. Malvern Neighborhood Greenway: This project would connect the existing Hominy Creek Greenway on-street to the Hawthorne at Bear Creek Apartments, where it can be off-street and connect into existing pathways at Malvern Hills Park. A final connection would be from the park to Patton Avenue. 4. Downtown Neighborhood Greenway Loop: This loop would take users around the outer edge of downtown and make important connections to Spine Greenways and other neighborhood greenways. Some of this loop already has existing bike lanes, sidewalks, and traffic calming measures. The Coxe Avenue and South Lexington Avenue Complete Streets Design project segment of this loop can serve as a first phase of implementation.
the Oakley neighborhood to the Swannanoa River Greenway using Merchant Street and Glendale Avenue. 6. Beaverdam Connector Neighborhood Greenway: This would connect Beaverdam Lake to Elkwood Avenue. This short stretch makes a critical connection from the Beaver Lake to the Woodfin boundary, where Woodfin’s future Beaverdam Creek Greenway will connect. 7. Haw Creek/Kensington Neighborhood Greenway: This project would connect the Haw Creek and Beverly Hills neighborhoods to the Swannanoa River Greenway.
5. Oakley West Neighborhood Greenway: This project would serve as the primary connection of
/
GAP Plan
/// 97
1
Map 19. Neighborhood Greenways Pilot Project Map
Woodfin
N3 N17
Mile
Beaver Lake
26
NORTH
N18
N6 N7 N28
240
N12
240
N32 N15 40
N20
N33 N23
40
40
Biltmore Estate
Biltmore Forest
26
DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE NEIGHBORHOOD GREENWAY PILOT PROJECTS
240
Pilot Projects
N6
Downtown Asheville
Lake Julian
City of Asheville Area Cities N7
AVL Regional Airport
Fletcher N28
N32
0.5 Miles
98 /// GAP Plan /
Mills River
Table 11. City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Neighborhood Greenway Pilot Projects
City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Neighborhood Greenway Pilot Projects Project Phasing Notes (Project in Bold are the City’s Top 10 Projects) Map ID #
Greenway Name
Next Steps
Project Development Notes
Short Term
Medium Term
Long Term
Planning
TBD
TBD
N3
Beaverdam Connector Neighborhood Greenway
Planning
N6, N7, & N32
Downtown Neighborhood Greenway Loop
Planning, some sections completed or being studied
Likely will be broken into implementation sections with Coxe/Lexington Ave. being the first to implement
Planning
TBD
TBD
N12 & N15
Haw Creek/Kennsington Neighborhood Greenway
Planning
Phase in when the Swannanoa River Greenway will be built
Planning
TBD
TBD
N17 & N18
Lakeshore Neighborhood Greenway
Planning
May be partially an Arterial Greenway and partially this typology. TBD based on a more detailed study
Planning
TBD
TBD
N20
Malvern Neighborhood Greenway
Planning
Connects much of Malvern Hills to Patton Ave., two parks and commercial
Planning
TBD
TBD
N23
Oakley West Neighborhood Greenway
Planning
Connects much of the Oakley Neighborhood to the Swannanoa River Greenway
Planning
TBD
TBD
Construction
Soon to go into construction
Construction
Preliminary Engineering
Interim improvements to make a safe connection for the Swannanoa River Greenway
ALL
South Slope and River N28 & Arts Neighborhood N32 Greenway Connector
N33
Thompson Street Neighborhood Greenway
See the following page for a more detailed description of each of the pilot projects
/
GAP Plan
/// 99
S TEP 4 : THE P RIO RITIZ AT IO N PRO C E S S A N D RES U LT S Factors Determining Project Priorities Several factors were weighed to develop the top implementation projects. This includes projects at all stages of development, from those that are just referenced in this plan, to those that are “shovel ready” (ready for construction). The determining factors that elevate greenways to the highest ranking are: Project Development Stage Status, Including Funding Status Stages of project development sequentially include: (1) documented in a plan; (2) a full feasibility study has been developed; (3) construction documents and permitting are completed; (4) recent cost estimates are available and complete, making it a “shovel ready” project; and (5) full or partial funding is secured and the project is awaiting the bidding process. Importance to the Entire Greenway Network’s Connectivity Greenways that are important to regional connectivity, like the Greenway Spines, are priorities, as are greenways that connect whole areas of the City to these Greenway Spines. Additionally,the Greenway Spines that serve as the backbone to the Hellbender Regional Trail System (see Map 16) were given a high priority. Equity Greenways that connect areas of the City with high Equity and Destination scores were prioritized. Additionally, greenways are prioritized so that they are equitably distributed across the City. Legacy neighborhoods may require stabilization plans prior to project implementation. This evaluation may result in revised projects, as well as delays to address stabilization efforts. For more information see Chapter 8, the Pre-Design Project Development Checklist. Potential for Funding Greenways that align with transportation funding criteria, or other funding opportunities, are most likely to be funded, regardless of where they fall on the priority list. Typical criteria include opportunity to spur economic development and tourism, improve access, and alignment with community plans.
100 /// GAP Plan /
Partnerships that Advance Development Partnerships with the MPO or NCDOT, as well as other regional partners (e.g., the Fonta Flora State Trail) or willing private landowners, can elevate the likelihood of greenway implementation. Project Development Status When looking at the top priorities for funding greenways, it is important to consider projects that have momentum and support and have already been partially funded and are in development. Community Input Once the full list of greenway corridors was identified and assigned a typology, the community was asked to weigh in on their priority Arterial and Neighborhood Greenways in an online survey. Since the Greenway Spines are the highest priority, often associated with larger roadway or redevelopment projects, and critical to the network, the Project Team decided to have the public only weigh in on the Arterial Greenways and Neighborhood Greenways.
Public Input Summary Table 12 shows the top ranking greenways based on public input and includes selected public comments that are representative of each greenway that ranked higher. Secondary Priority The following projects received a fewer amount of public votes than the high-medium priority projects, but did receive a minimum of three votes each. • Rhododendron-Falconhurst Neighborhood Greenway • Richmond Hill Neighborhood Greenway • Weaver Park Neighborhood Greenway • Montford Arterial Greenway • Chunn’s Cove Arterial Greenway • Beaucatcher Neighborhood Greenway • Shiloh Neighborhood Connections (multiple) • Fairway Neighborhood Greenway • Haw Creek Arterial Greenway
Table 12. Public Input Results and Comments (Arterial Neighborhood Greenways Below are Listed in Order of Public Rankings)
Arterial Greenways
Neighborhood Greenways
Lakeshore Greenway/Lakeshore Neighborhood Greenway: “Important route for pedestrians and bikers but there isn't enough safe space. Lots of commuter traffic.”
Downtown Loop Neighborhood Greenway: “It will open up safe connections between the Mountainside Park/ Southside area and North Asheville.”
Beaverdam Extension Greenway: “This will be essential in completing a safe way to navigate from Lakeshore to Merrimon.” “Very important to improve walkability of this segment.”
Kimberly Neighborhood Greenway: “This is a really valuable relief street for anyone walking or riding bikes going north/south and not wanting to deal with Merrimon. I use it all the time!”
Reed Creek Greenway: “So so important. Connecting the existing greenway network with the river is a must. Plenty of people are already walking/biking out this way and it is not safe.”
UNCA Neighborhood Greenway: “Great start, needs to connect more thoroughly to UNCA campus and Botanical Gardens and Broadway beyond.”
Amboy Sidepath Greenway: “Creating a separate (high speed) path would significantly improve the utility of Amboy Road as a 'commuting' route into the city.” Note, there were many comments about the need to improve the Amboy Bridge over the French Broad River.
River Arts Neighborhood Greenway: “This is an important connection between West Asheville/RAD and the South Slope and into downtown. It is nice because it is along a street that by design slows drivers down and makes it more comfortable to ride on.”
Sweeten Creek Greenway: “This would be an extremely beneficial connection between parts of south Asheville and downtown (and beyond). As of now, I would not ride my bike with my daughter or by myself from South Asheville to downtown. There is no safe route that prioritizes bikes let alone pedestrians of any kind.”
Malvern Neighborhood Greenway: “This is a major connection for West Asheville; it would enable a lot of residents in West Asheville to access the park in that area and not have to drive. Parking is limited and it would make it much safer for everyone wishing to use the park.”
Biltmore/McDowell Greenway: “The best option for safely expanding multimodal travel between downtown and Biltmore Village.”
Thompson Street Neighborhood Greenway: “This is super important to connecting Oakley to the outside world. Oakley is one of the most boxed in areas in the city tracks on both sides, I-240, and sidewalks roads on both sides of the Swannanoa.”
Canie Creek Greenway: “The Canie Creek space is an important greenspace for the Malvern Hills neighborhood already, making it formal and connecting it to other greenways would give our neighborhood more walking access and possibly better walking commutes.”
Oakley West Neighborhood Greenway:“This will represent one of the safest ways for Oakley residents to make their way to the Swannanoa River Greenway... We would also like slow street connections via East Street and via Stoner Road.”
Rhododendron Creek Greenway: ”Good connection point for W. Asheville residents to hop on at the park or Sand Hill Road.” Smith Mill Creek Greenway: “This is an important connection that is currently very challenging to make on a bicycle.” Reed Creek Extension Greenway: “Would improve access between Reed Creek greenway and points south.” Ragsdale Greenway: “This would see high use since it would connect/extend the popular Hominy Creek greenway.”
/
GAP Plan
/// 101
TO P 10 P RIO R I T Y G R E E NWAY P RO JEC TS F O R T H E C I T Y OF A S H E V IL L E The following are the top priority greenway projects that the City of Asheville should advance. They are listed in order of importance. Note that some of these may contain portions of NCDOT projects which are detailed in their own section on page 105. Greenways that will be built solely as NCDOT projects are described there as well. Neighborhood Greenways are not included in this list but pilot projects have been suggested further on page 96. The following list briefly describes each project, its status, and factors for ranking this project as a “top” project.
1 / Swannanoa Greenway (Greenway Spine) The Swannanoa Greenway is a top priority for the City and is a major east-west connection of the regional Hellbender Trail Network. This includes multiple implementation stages with two NCDOT projects, the Thompson Street Neighborhood Greenway as an interim measure, and City-led sections. This is also part of the Fonta Flora State Trail.
2 / Beaucatcher Greenway (Arterial Greenway) This project would complete the envisioned “River to Ridge” initiative of connecting greenways from the French Broad River, through downtown, and up to Beaucatcher. Construction documents have been completed for the greenway and it has partial funding. Some redesign is being considered to lessen the cost and preserve trees. This project ranks high due to its near completion status.
3 / Reed Creek Greenway (Arterial Greenway) The City has received funding to initiate a feasibility study for this greenway. The City will need to secure funding for full construction documents and construction. This would include the uncompleted sections north to Broadway and south to downtown.
4 / French Broad River Greenway North (NRADTIP) (Greenway Spine) This greenway would connect the existing French Broad River and Wilma Dykeman Greenway north to the planned Woodfin Greenway. It is a critical regional greenway and part of the Hellbender Trail Network.
Figure 21. A Portion of the Soon to be Constructed Swannanoa River Greenway (from Glendale Avenue to Bleachery Boulevard).
102 /// GAP Plan /
5 / Hominy Creek Greenway East (Greenway Spine) This segment connects West Asheville, Shelburne Road, and the existing Hominy Creek Greenway to the Farmers Market and Hominy Creek Park. Buncombe County has received funding from the French Broad MPO through the NCDOT’s Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP) process to do preliminary engineering for the greenway section that connects the French Broad Greenway to the WNC Farmers Market. The unfunded portion is the section from the Farmers Market to Shelburne Road.
6 / West Asheville Rail-with-Trail Greenway and Deaverview Connector (Greenway Spine) This packages a regional Greenway Spine (the railwith-trail) with a greenway that connects to Roger Farmer Memorial Park and affordable housing in the Deaverview neighborhood. Other than a constructability analysis done for this plan (which is detailed in Step 1 and Step 2 of this Chapter) no further study has been done. A greenway feasibility study is the first step for this project. This project ranks high due to its regional connectivity, access to many neighborhoods and commercial areas, and broad service to an area of the City that has one of the higher destination and equity scores. Working with the legacy neighborhoods (like the Emma community) surrounding this corridor will be a critical initial step.
9 / South Asheville Rail-with-Trail/ Sweeten Creek Road Greenway (Spine and Arterial Greenways) A greenway/multi-use path on Sweeten Creek Road is needed to connect the South Asheville Rail-withTrail into Biltmore Village and to the Swannanoa River Greenway. Further discussions with Watco-Blue Ridge Southern Railroad are needed prior to initiating a feasibility study.
10 / Smith Mill Creek Greenway (Arterial Greenway) This greenway starts near the Falconhurst Preserve and parallels Patton Avenue, ultimately connecting into the greenway that will be traveling over Bowen Bridge. The City’s Parks Department analyzed the feasibility of the greenway through a report.
7 / Hendersonville Road Multi-use Path and Jake Rusher Greenway (Arterial Greenways) Two different greenways link together to create a connection to Lake Julian and Jake Rusher Parks. It is critical that the Lake Julian Greenway is advanced simultaneously (led by the County) to make a complete connection. This project is important because it provides connection to commercial development, two parks, and benefits an area that is under-served by pedestrian/bicycle infrastructure.
8 / Rhododendron Creek Greenway (Arterial Greenway) Rhododendron Creek connects West Asheville Park and the surrounding neighborhoods to the Hominy Creek Greenway. The City has acquired some of the easements needed to complete this greenway. Due to this being a short segment, bypassing feasibility into preliminary engineering is recommended.
/
GAP Plan
/// 103
2
Map 20. Top Greenway Projects Map
Miles
Woodfin
NORTH
Beaver Lake 26
3
4 240
6 10
2 240
2
40
1 8 40
1
9
40
5
Biltmore Estate
Biltmore Forest
26
9
TOP TEN GREENWAY PROJECTS
DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE
Lake Julian
240
Greenway Spine Arterial Greenway
7
Greenway Network Components Downtown Asheville
26
City of Asheville Area Cities
AVL Regional Airport
2 Fletcher
2 2
104 /// GAP Plan /
Mills River
N C D OT GR E E NWAY ( M U LTI-U SE PAT H S ) P RO JEC TS PR IO R I T I Z AT ION
• Bleachery Boulevard/Swannanoa Road to Azalea Park (NCDOT project #U-6046): construction anticipated beyond 2030. • Thompson Street Neighborhood Greenway: Interim improvements will make it a much improved connection to the existing greenway project. See more about this in the Neighborhood Greenway section of this plan.
The following are projects that NCDOT would be involved with or lead as the manager of state roads. The projects are typically a part of road corridor improvement studies that include complete street measures. Much of NCDOT’s prioritization of projects may change due to a funding shortfall, so the timelines indicated below will likely change. Note that NCDOT and other transportation organizations typically refer to greenways as multi-use paths.
2. North RADTIP (French Broad River Greenway): Right-of-way acquisition is anticipated for 2025 and construction for 2029. This is packaged as part of the I-26 connector projects below. NCDOT will lead the design and construction of the greenway from Pearson Bridge Road to the planned Woodfin Greenway (Riverside Road/ Broadway interchange).
NCDOT Projects and Corridor Studies that Include Greenway Elements
3. I-26 Connector Project Greenway Improvements: Construction is anticipated in stages, beginning in 2024 for the downtown sections. The City’s Transportation and Planning & Urban Design Departments will study plans to ensure that there are neighborhood connections to the pedestrian/bicycle facilities built with this project . Also of note, significant NCDOT rightof-way will be purchased in the area of the Smith Mill Creek. The City should explore future options to build the Smith Mill Greenway and also explore ways to incorporate natural surface trails in this area as part of Asheville Unpaved.
Map 21 illustrates the locations of the numbered projects listed below. 1. Swannanoa River Greenway: • Meadow Road (NCDOT project #U-4739): construction is anticipated in 2029. • Biltmore Avenue to Glendale Avenue (NCDOT project #U-5832) construction anticipated beyond 2030. This is deemed by the City as the highest priority of all projects. The City is looking at the entire Swannanoa River Road corridor as an opportunity for urban revitalization and a chance to move the road away from the river which floods and is eroding. The greenway will be part of a broader project that is envisioned for the entire corridor.
21
Image 21 / Proposed West Asheville Greenway as part of I-26 Connector Project. (Source: French Broad River Metropolitan Planning Organization Governing Board Presentation, 015)
/
GAP Plan
/// 105
\7 22
Image 22 / Hendersonville Road Proposed Multi-use Path (After) south of Long Shoals Road Entering the City of Asheville. (Source: Hendersonville Road Corridor Study, 2021)
4. Sweeten Creek Road Greenway: (NCDOT project #U-2801A) A 10-foot multi-use path is proposed along the entire five-mile length of the Sweeten Creek Road corridor. NCDOT is considering removing this project from the State Transportation Improvement Plan list due to funding shortfalls. 5. Hendersonville Road: The majority of Hendersonville Road was evaluated in a corridor study led by the French Broad River MPO. A fivemile greenway/multi-use path was incorporated into recommendations. The plan recommends building the first segment from Rock Hill Road to the Walmart Super Center. Note that another segment of this corridor is prioritized in this plan’s Top 10 Greenway Priority Projects. 6. Tunnel Road: This corridor was also studied by the French Broad River MPO where the City identified the need for improved pedestrian and bicycle access. Results from the Tunnel Road Corridor Study indicate that sections of the studied corridor (Beaucatcher Tunnel to the South Tunnel/ Swannanoa River Road intersection) have excess capacity, meaning there is potential space to reallocate roadway use for bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Each segment of the roadway addressed in the study includes a “Road Space Reassignment within Existing Right-of-Way” and a “Road Space
106 /// GAP Plan /
Reassignment (with Development)” scenario with cross sections that illustrate recommended multimodal facilities. In most cases, the recommendation is for a multi-use path or some type of separated facilities that dedicate more space to bicyclists and pedestrians. 7. Craven Street Bridge: Craven Street Bridge connects the French Broad River West Greenway with the Wilma Dykeman Greenway. A small sidewalk on the bridge is heavily trafficked by greenway users, often forcing them onto the road when there are multiple users. Improvements to this bridge are needed to better accommodate greenway users. 8. Biltmore Avenue/McDowell Corridor Study: The Biltmore Avenue and McDowell Street Corridor Study evaluated Biltmore Avenue, McDowell Street/Asheland Avenue, and Southside Avenue for changes that may better service all modes of transportation. The plan recommends 19 project segments that include an advisory shoulder, neighborhood greenways (termed bicycle boulevards in the study), one-way separated bike lanes, segments with sharrows, a sidepath and a two-way separated bike lane.
1 Map 21. NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Projects
Mile
Woodfin
NORTH
Beaver Lake 26
2
6 3 240
240
7 40
8 1 40
4
40
Biltmore Estate
Biltmore Forest
26
5 OTHER PLANNED PROJECTS Adopted Study with a MUP
DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE
Discuss with City 240
Lake Julian
6
I-26 Improvements STIP Funded Downtown Asheville City of Asheville
26
Area Cities
3
AVL Regional Airport Fletcher
8 Mills River
/ GAP Plan /// 107
rch Conne ctor
y
Gr
wa
er
en
w
ay
Oteen Chu
rch Conne ctor
Oteen Chu
aT -Se to
ek
ilo h Gr
ee n w a y
40
40
l rai
Sw
an
no a na
Ri
v
le Oak ut h So
NCDOT project Future planning & design Constructed/soon to be constructed
Mounta ins -
Sh
40
n ee
Swannanoa Greenway Status
y
ty
as
N
F ai r o n wa y nec tor
Do
co
Ba
0
0.5
1 Mile
SWA NNAN OA RIVER G R EEN WAY Shi Est- loh Wst .
INVESTMENT LEVEL
$$$$$ (Multi-million dollar project) Costs will include design, ROW, an construction with 1-2 major bridge spans of the Swannanoa River. Next steps include pre-design activities like traffic analysis, public engagement, and other steps to inform more detailed design.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
RR OAD
EET Image to right shows shorter and long-term options for the corridor.
IVE ANO AR SWA NN
PS ON OM
• Description: This 10-14’ greenway is the city’s major east-west connection running along the Swannanoa River. It connects commercial, Biltmore Village, West Asheville, Oakley, and East Asheville, and Biltmore Village.
ST R
• Length: 8.77 miles
108 /// GAP Plan /
A
B
• Greenway Type: Spine
TH
Wil m a
Kennilworth Greenway
wn
te
Be a Gr ucat ee nw cher ay
to
wn
Sw eet en Cr e
r
ey W nw e ay st
y East Oakle way Green
3.04 Miles /Amboy Rd to Biltmore Ave
St re et
re G r e ann an o a Riv Azalea Park
Rive nano a Swan enw a y Gre nt y ) (Cou
s on
y
t
Th
p om
l ak ee O Gr
es
er
a Ri v er
CC
Sw
ills
ell
rW
B
an o
e Gr
ay
wa
ow
ell Dow
cD
Mc
ve
Sw
n an
A
w en
er
en
on gt
re
County-Planned Greenway
in ns
1.13 Miles
Bev
Gre
H ly
Ke
n w ay
ranch ss y B G ra way en Gre
e
M
o re
Potential Other Greenway Mountains-to-Sea Trail
Gr e
tm
Neighborhood Greenway
1.39 Miles
oad
Bil
Biltm o
Existing Arterial Greenway Arterial Greenway
3.18 Miles
el R
Greenway Spine
EAST ASHEVILLE
L o w er
nn
Existing Spine
Soon To Be Constructed Spine
d Riv
Haw Creek
Weaver Park
Tu
Greenway Type
West
rly Kimbe
1
ford
CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS
Note that the City wants to look at a larger project area that may mean the greenway and road are not constrained to the road’s current footprint. Actual greenway alignment is to be determined.
CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS
3-lane road section at intersections, middle lane tappers away as road leaves intersections.
SWANNANOA RIVER ROAD (WEST SECTOIN
A
COMMERCIAL/ PRIVATE PROPERTY
12-foot Greenway
(RE-DESIGN)
Maintained riparian edge
Existing Utilities
Swannanoa River
Buffer varies Min. 5’ Average 10’
SWANNANOA RIVER ROAD
Existing Guardrail
GREENWAY
5’Buffer
EXISTING SWANNANOA RIVER ROAD
KEY ELEMENTS
*See Location on Map by Corresponding Letters
A. Greenway designed and built as part of NCDOT road redesign project as part of a larger city-driven Swannanoa River Road (Road revitalization and flood control project. Greenway is Associated Segments: proposed to be on the north side of Swannanoa River 1-A Road.
Re-design)
B. Thompson Street Advisory Bike Lanes (or yield condition Notes of Interest: roadway) can serve as an interim connection until there-design where significant takeings occur. Only feasible in case of road NCDOT sections along Swannanoa River Road can be B built. C. Greenway section near the Municipal Course would be designed and built as part of a NCDOT road redesign project. The greenway would be on the south side of the road.
Advisory Bike Lanes on Thompson Street can serve as an interim connection for the greenway.
Simpson Street- On-Street Greenway Connector (Examp
4 Existing utility
C
Existing Swannanoa River road
Existing utility
Associated Segments:
8-12-foot Greenway
Reduced river buffer
5-C
Potential floodplain impacts
Notes of Interest:
SWANNANOA RIVER ROAD (EAST SECTOIN
On-street paint can act as traffic calming • Road has minimal local traffic
5’Buffer
Existing fence
EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY EXISTING CITY OWNED GOLF COURSE
SWANNANOA RIVER ROAD
GREENWAY Swannanoa River Retaining wall height varies in size and Greenway may need railing in some locations Represents slope in areas of most constricted space
Swannanoa River Road (No Road Re-design) GAP Plan Associated Segments:
D-2
E-2
/
E-3
/// 109
B EAUCATCHER GREEN WAY
0
Greenway Type
500
1,000 Ft
Kimberly
Existing Spine
Weaver Pa rk
INVESTMENT LEVEL
Soon To Be Constructed Spine Greenway Spine
Existing Arterial Greenway Arterial Greenway Neighborhood Greenway
Beucatcher is mostly funded. Even if the design is revised, it may be close to being shovel ready.
Potential Other Greenway
Tun
nel
t Colleg e S C o n n e ct o r
$$$$$
County-Planned Greenway
Beaucatcher Greenway Status
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
City-led project
• Greenway Type: Arterial Greenway
Ro
ad
Gre
enw ay
NOR
wn
A
N
Natural surface trails proposed in Mountainside this area
IO
D
Be G auc re a en tc w he ay r
K
Do
1
E
A
2
Be a Gr uc ee atc nw he ay r
SO
UT HE
RN
SE CT
Park
KENILWORTH Bi lt m or e Av e
ell ow cD t. B ) e M Op or ay ( l tm nw B i r ee G
Existing conditions and future example of the greenway
e nilwort
N SE CTIO
N
Loo or ect onn tow
nC
B
reen w ay hG
C
p
• Description: Connects Memorial Stadium to the historic Helen’s Bridge and a spur trail to connect to the future White Fawn Overlook Park. The City plans to modify full construction documents to be able to build access sections at both ends that enhance public access and safety and can be built with existing funds.
110 /// GAP Plan /
240
DOWNTOWN
• Length: 1.25 miles
THER
2
CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS
CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS
KEY ELEMENTS
SOUTHERN SECTION
*See Location on Map by Corresponding Letters
MCCORMICK FIELD
HI
W
MEMORIAL STADIUM
MEMORIAL STADIUM CONNECTOR
Natural surface trails proposed in this area
DR
C. The Greenway connects to Beaumont Street. Beaumont Street will be improved to allow for separated pedestrian/ bicycle facilities. The greenway terminates at Helen’s Bridge.
TE
DR
ER
B. The northern section travels along Ardmion Park with some minor safety improvements as it travels on-road,
N
W FA
D AN EX AL
A. The southern section will be improved, unpaved roadbed to allow for drainage and improved surface, but will remain unpaved. A connection to Memorial Stadium will be made and it is yet to be determined whether it is paved or unpaved.
WHITE FAWN RESEVOIR RES
BEUACATCHER GREENWAY
EVO IR R
D
R
ER D
AND
X ALE
NORTHERN SECTION
D. A natural surface trail system of 3-4 miles of trail is proposed in Mountainside Park surrounding the greenway.
I
RK
E TH
IN
T AR
NG
JR
DR
LU
M
R
ON
DE AN
M AU
EX
BE
AL
E. The greenway would ultimately connect to the future proposed White Fawn Park, which could also serve as a small trailhead.
TS
DR
T M AU
BE
AR
R DR
ANDE
ALEX
K
ION P
ARDM
T
PK
TS
IO N
ON
DM
BEUACATCHER GREENWAY
/
GAP Plan
/// 111
3
ee d
Cr ee k
D
Gr ee nw
y reenwa Emma G
240
PROJECT DESCRIPTION • Greenway Type: Arterial • Length: 1.13 miles • Description: Includes Reed Creek North from the existing greenway to Riverside Drive/Woodfin municipal boundary and the downtown connection south from the existing greenway.
Placemaking on the existing greenway section
112 /// GAP Plan /
Re
. tr ec n t n es Co W n ow op nt Lo
E
w
C
A Feasibility study is funded ($50,000) and soon to be underway. Remaining actions are design, ROW acquisition, and construction.
ee
Do
INVESTMENT LEVEL
ed
nw
r dG
or
ntf
Mo
ay
F
k
ee
Cr
Down
0
1,000
town Con n Loop
tor ec
y rw
rth No er iv ch Bro a d R er Fren Riv French Broa d
aG m
ill H d r on to m ec ch n Ri Con
0.56 Miles
R EED C REEK G REEN WAY $$$$$
ay
Kimberly Greenwa y
Rive r
road ch B Fren
ill Conn ector
Richm ond H
h Frenc Broad
y
a nw
Ri ve r
l
e re kG ar
C
26
MONTFORD
sheville Rail Trail st A We
rP
0.57 Miles
Soon to be analyzed in a feasibility study
Em
ve
ay
R
Reed Creek Greenway Status
nw
ea
County-Planned Greenway
B
ree
W
Potential Other Greenway
kG
r to
Neighborhood Greenway
ee
ec
Arterial Greenway
Glen
Cr
nn Co
Existing Arterial Greenway
ed
eek Cr
CA
Greenway Spine
Re
s n'
N
Soon To Be Constructed Spine
A
U
Existing Spine
French Broad River
Greenway Type
Nort h
CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS
Richmon
2,000 Ft
Tu Ro
CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS
D
E
LEFT: The newest section of the greenway to be built RIGHT: This pedestrian overpass crossing of I-240 will be improved with the I-26 Connector project and will be a critical link to downtown and the Downtown Neighborhood Greenway Loop
KEY ELEMENTS
*See Location on Map by Corresponding Letters
F
A. Reed Creek will connect to French Broad North (NRADTIP) Greenway at the intersection of Riverside Road and Broadway. The Future NCDOT I-26 Project will redesign this intersection at which point a much safer crossing should be integrated into design. B. This section may go on the north side of Broadway (on University of North Carolina property) or on the south side of Broadway. The feasibility study will determine this.
Location to be determined
C. Existing placemaking and branding of the greenway can be integrated into future segments. D. The southern section is the newest to be built. E. The pedestrian overpass to be improved as part of I-26 Connector project. F. A feasibility study will determine how the greenway will travel on Hill Street.
Pedestrian Overpass Crossing
E
/
GAP Plan
/// 113
4
CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS
0
$$$$$ hm Riicll H
• Description: The City is leading a the 1.27-mile section along the French Broad River. At Pearson Bridge Road, the greenway would cross at-grade and then parallel Riverside Drive as a multi-use path for another 0.56 miles. This section would be led by NCDOT.
Br
Cr
ee
oa
kG
dw
ay
1,000 Ft
re
St
en
wa
y
Greenway Type Existing Spine
R
Soon To Be Constructed Spine Greenway Spine
r dR ive
• Length: 1.83 miles
0.56 Miles
C
French Broa
• Greenway Type: Spine
r
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
ed
D
n so St ar e Pe idg Br
A feasibility study already completed and led by Buncombe County. Design, ROW acquisition and construction are next steps. The City anticipates engaging consultants to assist with the design process in 2022.
Re
Fren ch (Nor Broad R th R ADT iver IP)
INVESTMENT LEVEL
E
r
mond Hill Con Rich necto
ve ch Broad Ri Fren
F R E NCH BROA D GREEN WAY ( NOR TH R ADT IP)
500
Existing Arterial Greenway Arterial Greenway Neighborhood Greenway Potential Other Greenway
26
County-Planned Greenway
French Broad Greenway (North RADTIP) Status NCDOT to make improvements as part of Riverside Drive Project
nt
B
th or (N
fo
rd
Gr
wy
DT RA ) IP
114 /// GAP Plan /
Tra il
tor
Mo
r ve
R a il
er Riv
ille
ec
D. The greenway is proposed as a multi-use path along Riverside Drive from Pearson Bridge to Broadway due to railroad constraints along the river. E. The Broadway/Riverside Drive intersection will be redesigned as part of the Future I-26 project. The Woodfin Blueway Greenway design (led by the County) is underway and travels north for several more miles.
ll
Ri
Hi
French Br o ad
W. Ash
ev
C. The greenway is proposed to travel alongside the river which is still largely industrialized in this area. It is proposed to cross on-grade at Pearson Bridge Road.
Richm on d
nn Co
B. The I-26 Connector project will have new elevated freeway connection that travels over this area and ties into the existing I-26.
C French B road
A. The proposed greenway connects into the existing Wilma Dykeman and French Broad Greenways just north of the Norfolk Southern railroad bridge over the French Broad River.
City-led; soon to be developed construction documents
1.27 Miles
Mi Smith
ek re C l l
A eville t Ash ay s e W nw Gree
240
v il le
KEY ELEMENTS
*See Location on Map by Corresponding Letters
h e ts As A r . W v er Ri
r. ct n C
CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS
C
's
nn
e Gl
ed
Re
Cr ee k
TYPICAL GREENWAY PROPOSED ALONG RIVERSIDE DRIVE
ek
e Cr
TYPICAL GREENWAY PROPOSED ALONG THE RIVER
Example Intersection Modifications: Shorten pedestrian crossing, image from the NC 251/ Riverside Drive Greenway Feasibility Study
Top of Bank Varies
French Broad River
Example Intersection Modifications: Shorten pedestrian crossing, image from the NC 251/Riverside Drive Greenway Feasibility Study
D
/
GAP Plan
/// 115
5
CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS
Hominy Creek Greenway
Neighborhood Greenway Potential Other Greenway
way
County-Planned Greenway
240
B
Hominy Creek Greenway Status Buncombe County-led STIP project City-led connections
Ho mi ny
e Cre t es
1
R ad
dR ay Broa nw ree rG ive
h Br o
40
KEY ELEMENTS
C Ho m y in
re
C
B. Decommissioned bridge, proposed as a greenway focal point overlooking Hominy Creek.
iver
*See Location on Map by Corresponding Letters
A. Connect to greenways via high visibility crosswalk at Shelburne Road to connect to future Rhododendron Creek Greenway, and connection to existing Hominy Creek Greenway.
ch Fren
c Fren
kW
• Description: Connects the existing Hominy Creek Greenway and West Asheville to the WNC Farmers Market. From there, it connects to the French Broad River Greenway and Hominy Creek River Park.
Arterial Greenway
French Broa d Riv er
• Length: 1.08 miles (0.56 for City-led sections)
Existing Arterial Greenway
ek G reen
• Greenway Type: Spine
Greenway Spine
Bent Cre
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Soon To Be Constructed Spine
A
$$$$$ County leading middle portion to connect further south along Highway 191. The City would need to lead sections to ensure connectivity to city greenway and parks.
Existing Spine
Rhododendron Creek
HO MIN Y CR E E K GREEN WAY INVESTMENT LEVEL
Greenway Type
WEST ASHEVILLE
ek
Ea
D
E
st
2
C. Connect to the WNC Farmers Market led by Buncombe County. D. Bridge would be required to cross Hominy Creek to get to French Broad River Greenway and Hominy Creek Park. E. Exact alignment to be determined and should minimize disturbance to parking, and is in high demand during the summer.
116 /// GAP Plan /
0
500
1,000 Ft
CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS
A closeup of the Shelburne Road area
BEFORE AND AFTER OF DECOMISSIONED BRIDGE
B
/
GAP Plan
/// 117
rk
a te
co
INVESTMENT LEVEL
$$$$$ Feasibility study, design, ROW acquisition, and construction are next steps.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION • Greenway Type: Spine • Length: 6.6 miles (rail-with-trail) and 0.88 for the Deaverview Greenway • Description: Greenway proposed within Blue Ridge Southern Railroad right-of-way. This greenway scores high for addressing equity and connectivity needs. Also has a proposed connection to the Deaverview area. Public engagement with the Emma Community is essential to meeting equity issues in this area.
118 /// GAP Plan /
Kim be rly
W ea ve r Pa
E mm a Fr
e
y
Grw
re e k Bent C
st We
WE S T A SHE V I L L E R A IL -W ITH-TR AIL & DE AV E R V I E W CO NNEC TOR
An example of a rail-with-trail in Blackstone River Bike Path in Rhode Island
40
d R i v er
0.5
rG
ve
T r a il
il k
y
ee
0
w el l G r w
Cr
i n an o a R
hB ro a
.
cD o
H om i ny
Cr
eM
Enk a H er i t a g e Trail
k
or
26
ENKA
S wa n
ree
wy Gr
eC
ch
t
40
l Rags d a
ny
B
es
le
h B r o ad R i v e r G r w y nc
ek
c en Fr
vil
th
an
an
a
Ho m i
A
e sh
rW
eC re
A m bo y R o a d S i d e p a
ni
City-led project
R
Nas t y B r
ve
Ca
Enka Heritage Trail/County-led greenway
WEST ASHEVILLE
Ri
West Asheville Greenway Rail-with-Trail Greenway & Deaverview Connector Status
ern Malv nway Gree
County-Planned Greenway
op
tm
Potential Other Greenway
240
W ilm a Dy k e m
B
Neighborhood Greenway
B ro a d
Rh o d dend Cree ron Conn k ector
Arterial Greenway
A
Bil
C
Existing Arterial Greenway
D o w n to
French
Deaver vi Greenw ew ay
DOWNTOWN
Ba
Greenway Spine
W est A sh C o n n e ev i l l ctor e
B
W
e
Ha C o z el nn M i ll ec to r S m i t h M i l l C ree k Co nn ec to r
Down Conn Loop
wn L o
A
lle
rd
ve r Ri
Soon To Be Constructed Spine
st
vi
M o n t fo
ad
D
Existing Spine
e sh
Trail
ch B r o en
Greenway Type
il Ra
Fr
6
CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS
1 Mile
r wy
CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS
ntown nector - East
KEY ELEMENTS
*See Location on Map by Corresponding Letters
A. Murphy Junction will be a challenging area where greenway, railroad, and Emma Road intersects. Crossing underneath the railroad needs to be studied further. B. Further analysis of all road and creek crossings are needed to ensure that the greenway can stay within railroad right-of-way. W KH
C. Deaverview Greenway connects into rail-with-trail at Roger D Farmer Park and Deaverview Road. Its western terminus is Deaverview Apartments. D. From Leicester Highway to Old Haywood Road the railroad right-of-way widens from 75-100 feet, allowing for significant buffering from the rail line. E. There is a challenging crossing area near the Lowe’s entrance off of Smokey Park Highway. See image to right.
EXISTING CONDITIONS ALONG THE RAIL LINE
See Appendix 9 for a more detailed analysis of the railwith-trail.
E
IN
LL
I RA
Y
R PA Y E
OK
SM
Challenging crossing area near entrance of Lowes off of Smokey Park Highway, yellow dashed line indicated potential greenway alignment options
INTERSECTION WITH PINEY PARK RD
INTERSECTION WITH BEAR CREEK RD
INTERSECTION WITH JOHNSON BLVD
MURPHY JUNCTION (TWO RAILROAD LINES AND SMITH MILL CREEK INTERSECT)
/
GAP Plan
/// 119
look Rd Gree nwa y
7
Arden Grwy (Co ulian/ u n t y) eJ k La
e
Juli Grw an/Arde y (C n oun ty)
D E
ville
Greenway Spine
n
a Lake Juli
i-u u lt Rd M
Existing Arterial Greenway Arterial Greenway
enw ay
Soon To Be Constructed Spine
C
Neighborhood Greenway
th Pa
County-Planned Greenway
Hendersonville Road Multi-use Path & Jake Rusher Greenway Status
B
Buncombe County-led as part of County’s Lake Julian Park
0
City-led project
H E N DE RS O NV I L L E ROAD M U LTI-U SE PATH & JAK E R U S HER GR E E NWAY INVESTMENT LEVEL
$$$$$
Proposed Greenway
Feasibility study, design, ROW acquisition, and construction are next steps.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION • Greenway Type: Arterial
Jake Rusher Park and Walking Path
• Length: 1 mile (City-led section) • Description: Greenways travels from Sweeten Creek, through Jake Rusher Park, and as a multi-use path along Hendersonville Road until it connects into the Lake Julian Greenway (County-led greenway).
120 /// GAP Plan /
A
se
Potential Other Greenway
The Jake Rusher Park existing walking path and proposed greenway
0.25
G re
Existing Spine
n erso nd He
Greenway Type
Jak e
Lak
y
eenwa
lian Gr
u Lake J
eville South Ash
Over
CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS
Rail Trail
S ch enc kP Gre kw y enw ay
n
he us R
r
0.5 Mile
CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS
KEY ELEMENTS
*See Location on Map by Corresponding Letters
A. Starting at Sweeten Creek Road, the greenway runs through Jake Rusher Park, which already has a walking loop around the park that could be partially expanded to accommodate a full-sized greenway. B. The crossing of Hendersonville Road will be a design challenge since there are no nearby signalized crossings. Options for improved crossing should be analyzed. C. A multi-use path can travel along Hendersonville Road as proposed in the Hendersonville Road Corridor Study, or a greenway can go behind businesses along the shore of Lake Julian. D. If paralleling the road, a greenway connection into the South Asheville Rail-with-Trail would require further study since there is opportunity to use the elevated bridge that is inactive (no longer being used by Duke’s Power Plant) in this spot to cross over Hendersonville Road. E. Connect into the proposed Lake Julian Greenway using the decommissioned rail line segment than runs from points D to E.
BEFORE AND AFTER AT JAKE RUSHER PARK
A
/
GAP Plan
/// 121
8
CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS
0
RH O D O D END RO N CR EEK G R EENWAY
500
1,000 Ft
INVESTMENT LEVEL
E
E
PROJECT DESCRIPTION • Greenway Type: Arterial
Fa Rh Co odod nn ec endr tor on -
S PHA
Sa nd
Hi
ll
Rd
OND SEC
Feasibility study for northern section (see map), design, ROW acquisition, and construction are next steps.
lco nh urs
t
$$$$$
• Length: 1 mile • Description: Rhododendron Creek is an important greenway connection for West Asheville, as it would connect much of the neighborhood to the river, French Broad River Greenway, the River Arts District, and west to the existing and proposed Hominy Creek.
D
Greenway Type
Greenway Spine
1
Existing Arterial Greenway
KEY ELEMENTS
Arterial Greenway Neighborhood Greenway
ASE
ay
C
2 Hom
B
i ny
ee Cr
st
k
A re
G
122 /// GAP Plan /
e nw
City-led design/build project
We
E. The Second Phase of the greenway needs further refinement and easements.
Rhododendron Creek Greenway Status
ek Cre
D. The greenway would connect through West Asheville Park where it would also connect a proposed Neighborhood Greenway.
County-Planned Greenway
in y Hom
C. The First Phase of the greenway is currently being assessed by the City. A design-build option is being explored. The City is working on finalizing easements.
Potential Other Greenway
T PH
A. Improved pedestrian/bicycle crossing needed to connect major greenway intersection.
FIRS
*See Location on Map by Corresponding Letters
on Creek Gr e dendr R h odo
Existing Spine Soon To Be Constructed Spine
B. The City has assessed how existing City-owned property can accommodate the greenway.
WEST ASHEVILLE
en
w ay
CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS
N CO SE D E AS PH
E
DAVENPORT RD
MORRIS ST
West Asheville Park
D
TALMADGE CT
T
RS
FI
TALMADGE ST
E
ER
AS
PH
RN
BU
EL SH D
MORNINGSIDE DR
REST LN
WESTFO
Rhododendron Creek
B City-owned property
SHEL
BURN
E RD A
Hominy Creek Greenway
Study area for Rhododendron Creek Park, representing the area where a greenway route is being studied.
/
GAP Plan
/// 123
A.
CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY
Fai rw a
B. C.
Bc
Br.
y
a . Rv. .B ilm Br W Fr.
wy Gr
F
Swe e
n
ten
Yorkshire Connector s. er nt Extn e C et re St loh Shi West t s Ea Rd ee b s Bu n Co
INVESTMENT LEVEL
$$$$$ Feasibility study, design, ROW acquisition, and construction are next steps.
ne
ct o
r
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
D
• Greenway Type: Spine • Length: 5.8 miles
D
E
Rock
le Oak ee n Gr
d
Hill R
ra
il
-S
ea T
• Description: This greenway is proposed to travel in Blue Ridge Southern Railroad’s existing right-of-way, which is wide in some areas. This line is also less active, making it a prime opportunity for a greenway.
40
y w Sou ay th
40
h Greenw ay ilo Sh
y wa en
Cre ek Gr e
s h eville Rail T rai l
R oa S OUTH A S HE V I L L E an S wa n R AIL -W I T H- T R A I L & SWEETEN CR E E K ROA D
r iv e
Oakley Grwy
Am. R. Fr R. r.
S. A
9
Ke n South Tunnel Road Greenway Rvrb n a Park no PROJECTS nna Swan a n a n oa Sw r Oa kle a Riv e r t ano e n e r an pson S t Sw om 0 0.5 1 Mile Th
t.
ty as Els. N Brd. Cnn.
in
s-t
o
Moun t a
C Hend
A. Greenway connects to Lake Julian Greenway to Jake Rusher Park Greenway.
y
Pkw
Greenway Type Existing Spine Soon To Be Constructed Spine
E. Railroad right-of-way becomes a challenge in this area, requiring the greenway to transition to a multi-use path on Sweeten Creek Road.
Mountains-to-Sea Trail
lle Ra il T
Arterial Greenway Neighborhood Greenway
S. Ashevi
Road
Potential Other Greenway
Overlook
County-Planned Greenway
Sweeten Creek multi-use Path; work with NCDOT
e Lak
South Asheville Rail-with-Trail; City-led project
A
Jul den /Ar ia n
ke al Ja eri
Ar t
Schn
.
Lake
r
e La k n n Be
S. Asheville Rail-with-Trail Sweeten Creed Road Greenway Status
S
F. The Swannanoa River Greenway Feasibility t pur Study proposed a new connection across Norfolk Southern’s rail line to Thompson Street in this area.
B
th Pa
Existing Arterial Greenway
D. The Shiloh community has identified several bicycle/pedestrian improvements that could connect well into this greenway.
124 /// GAP Plan /
se
Greenway Spine
C. A connection up to the Blue Parkway and the Mountains-to-Sea Trail should be coordinated with the National Park Service.
i-u Mult
B. Key roadway crossings can be enhanced to provide connections into the surrounding community.
rai l
dge
Ri Blue
Rd ville erson
KEY ELEMENTS
*See Location on Map by Corresponding Letters
La
ke J Gr ulia wy n (Co /Ard un en ty)
ing
ive r
to
n
R
a
rl y . . R Bev s nan Hill Swan
ns
CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS
i ver
B
3
Blue R
idge
Pkwy
0
Artist’s rendering of South Asheville Rail-with-Trail at Mills Gap Road
C
Connection to the Blue Ridge Parkway and Mountains-to-Sea Trail
/
GAP Plan
/// 125
rwy
Emma G
m
Greenway Type Soon To Be Constructed Spine
F
Existing Arterial Greenway Arterial Greenway Neighborhood Greenway
ay
W
RIVER ARTS DISTRICT
d oa Br
Smith Mill Creek Greenway Status Ri
0.25
0.5 Mile
S MI T H M ILL CREEK G R EEN WAY
h d. Bartle tct tor Neighbr e r t s Conn
0
Riv er A
Smith Mill Creek Greenway
a Wilm
Smith Mill Greenway Connection (Unpaved Trail)
r ve
WEST ASHEVILLE
enw
iv e le R
ch
eek G Smith Mill Cr
ay
Gre
Ashe v il est
en
nw
Smit
. tr nc C rts rA
Fr
A
urst Falconh ay Greenw
n
tto
Pa
B
D C
Patton Ave
e
to r
240
ctor
onne
eek C
l Cr h Mil
re e
County-Planned Greenway
E
We st As he vi lle
Haze lM ill Co nn ec
Potential Other Greenway
Av
ve r
r East ive
Greenway Spine
Ri
y
rw
G rd
fo
nt
Mo
Br
Existing Spine
H ill
dR oa Br ch en d Fr oa
ail Trail st Asheville R We
Ric hm on d
nch Fre
10
Em
CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS a
El. Br. C.
INVESTMENT LEVEL
$$$$$
KEY ELEMENTS
*See Location on Map by Corresponding Letters
Feasibility study, design, ROW acquisition, and construction are next steps.
A. The greenway ties into Falconhurst Natural Area, and a trail that will need to be unpaved per easement restrictions.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
B. The greenway passes alongside the Armory and crosses near or at Patton Avenue.
• Greenway Type: Arterial • Length: 1.6 miles • Description: Smith Mill Creek Greenway is proposed to travel parallel to Patton Avenue behind commercial strips and along Smith Mill Creek. It then is proposed to cross Patton Avenue where it intersects with at the proposed I-26 Connector. It then travels along Smith Mill Creek down to the river, along land that is proposed NCDOT right-of-way.
126 /// GAP Plan /
C. The greenway travels behind commercial development on the south side of Patton Avenue. D. The greenway would cross at the proposed I-26 junction with Patton Avenue. E. The trail would travel along Smith Mill Creek and what will eventually be NCDOT right-of-way. F. The trail travels down to the French Broad River. A design challenge at Murphy Junction will need to be worked out in order to navigate Norfolk Southern’s elevated crossing, as well as the junction with Emma Road and the proposed West Asheville Rail-with-Trail.
CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS
p oo
wn Co nn nt o Dow
e
L or ct
Bac ot
PL AC EHO LD E R I MAG E Smith Mill Creek
Potential location Potential for Smith Smith Mill Creek for Greenway (shown in Greenway blue) blue) Smith Mill Creek
Smith Mill Creek Greenway Connector to Patton Bridge & Downtown Asheville
Smith Mill Creek Greenway
The Visualization of the Proposed I-26 Connector and how the Smith Mill Creek Greenway interrelates (visualization provided by NCDOT)
/
GAP Plan
/// 127
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
6
THE ADA TRANSITION PLAN (A) SUMMARY
“
Lack of sidewalks or sidewalk curb ramps means people in wheelchairs have to go in roads, where people driving have trouble seeing something they don’t expect.” - East Asheville Resident
130 /// GAP Plan /
6
T H E A DA TR ANSITION PLAN (A) SUMMARY The overall goal of the Transition Plan is to remove barriers in Asheville’s public rights-ofway so that pedestrians with disabilities can fully participate in programs, services and activities that the City has to offer. The Transition Plan will result in a plan to remove barriers in the City’s existing public rights-of-way network. Given the length and technical nature of the evaluation and transition plan document, this chapter contains only a summary that highlights the purpose and next steps. For the full report, please refer to the accompanying ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan document.
The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 is a civil rights law that prohibits discrimination based on someone’s disability. Title II of the Act requires cities and towns to have a plan to make accommodations for everyone. The ADA Transition Plan component of Close the GAP will result in a new Transition Plan for the City’s Public Rights-of-Way. Examples of public rights-of-way include public streets, sidewalks, road crossings and pedestrian signals, greenways, bus stops, and on-street parking. The requirements for the Plan are as follows: • Identify physical obstacles (or barriers) that make it hard for people to travel and prioritize the areas that have the biggest impact. • Consider the methods to be used to make the facilities accessible. • Develop a schedule with benchmarks to remove barriers.
23
W H AT IS T H E A DA TR A N S ITIO N PL A N F O R T H E P U B L IC R IG H T S - O F - WAY ? Many people with disabilities in our City rely on our pedestrian network as their primary, or only, way to get from place to place. According to the 2019 American Community Survey, 12.2% of Asheville's population has some type of disability. Other sources report a greater disability presence. It is the City's responsibility to ensure that people with disabilities can move about City streets and buildings and participate in programs, services and activities without barriers.
Image 23 / A Person with a Vision Impairment Trying to Navigate the Public Right-of-Way. (Source: Janet Barlow)
/ GAP Plan /// 131
Quick Sheets #5:
What is the Difference Between the ADA Transition Plan and Pedestrian Plan?
SIMPLY: The ADA Plan is about UPGRADES to EXISTING pedestrian facilities and the Pedestrian Plan addresses where to construct NEW facilities. Both must be ADA compliant to provide access for all. What is included in the public rights-of-way? The public rights-of-way include all public streets, sidewalks, road crossings and pedestrian signals, greenways, bus stops, and on-street parking.
What is the difference between a standard ADA Transition Plan and this ADA Transition Plan for the Public Rightsof-Way? This Transition Plan addresses accessibility within the public rights-of-way and does not include information on the City of Asheville’s programs, practices, or building facilities not related to public rights-of-way.
What does ADA compliant mean? All new or altered pedestrian facilities within the City’s public rights-of-way (such as sidewalks, greenways, crossings, curb ramps, traffic signals, parking and bus stops) must meet (to the maximum extent that is feasible) certain requirements that allow access for individuals with disabilities. The route that must be kept compliant is called the Pedestrian Access Route (PAR). ADA compliance means that minimum standards must be met for each dimension or element along the pedestrian access route (PAR) . The following are some examples of elements that must be compliant along a pedestrian route: • Clear width and height (which is sometimes blocked by encroachments - or physical intrusions can include items such as utility poles, traffic signs, street furniture)
132 /// GAP Plan /
• Running grades (the slope in the same direction of travel) • Cross slopes (the slopes across the travel path) • Turning and maneuvering space (the space where a pedestrian turns directions of travel) • Horizontal openings (gaps in the surface of travel, such as a gap or hole in the sidewalk) • Vertical rises (obstructions that are typically bumps or lips, such as the displacement of a sidewalk panel) • Detectable Warning Surfaces (DWS) and locations (also known as truncated domes, DWS is a distinctive surface pattern of domes that are detectable by a cane or underfoot to alert people of their approach to street crossings or other intersections) • Traffic signal features (e.g., pedestrian signals and pushbuttons, audible messages and vibro-tactile features) • Parking and accessible route to parking spaces • Width and length of boarding and alighting areas at transit stops
24
Image 24 / Examples of Public Right-of-Way Include Streets, Sidewalks, Crossings, Pedestrian Signals and Bus Stops, Among Others.
TH E A DA S E L F- E VA L UAT ION Before developing a plan to remove accessibility obstacles, it is necessary to document those obstacles. This is done in an ADA Self-Evaluation and is required under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and 28 CFR 35.105, to perform a selfevaluation of its current transportation infrastructure policies, practices, and programs. Self-evaluation items include:
Review of Policies and Practices This self-evaluation includes what City policies and practices impact accessibility and examine how the City of Asheville implements these policies. Policies and practices are the standards, guidance and steps that the City follows to guide decisions and projects; while often invisible to the public, they are critical to how the public experiences the right-of-way. This step
will identify obstacles or barriers in City of Asheville's policies and practices. The goal is to develop a plan to provide accessibility and allow for full participation of individuals with disabilities. The results of this review are detailed in Chapter 9 and the accompanying ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan document.
Review Infrastructure Needs This self-evaluation examines the condition of the City of Asheville’s Pedestrian Access Route (PAR) and identifies the need for infrastructure improvements. This includes the sidewalks, curb ramps, pedestrian/ bicycle trails, street crossings, traffic control signals, on-street parking and transit facilities that are located within the City of Asheville rights-of-way. Any barriers to accessibility identified in the selfevaluation and the remedy to the identified barrier are set out in this transition plan.
/
GAP Plan
/// 133
Methodology and Approach In the past, the most common practice for reviewing infrastructure for ADA Transition Plans and SelfEvaluations across the United States has involved a detailed identification of pedestrian obstacles by creating a full inventory of every foot of sidewalk, every curb ramp, pedestrian signal, parking space and bus stop. This includes measuring every slope and dimension. This endeavor can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars and can take multiple years to complete. It creates massive amounts of data that cities struggle to manage and many never use. On top of this, it is common for cities to determine through this process that nearly every corridor will need some sort of compliance upgrade; and, frequently, up to 90% of facilities have at least one element of noncompliance.
5 25
The City of Asheville, like most communities, has limited resources and competing demands for them. Because of this, the City worked with industry leaders, with input from FHWA staff, that have been conducting ADA Transition Plans for the Public Right-of-Way based on a “corridor approach”.
The Corridor Approach The City of Asheville used a corridor evaluation methodology under the assumption that nearly all of the facilities in the public right-of-way contain at least one non-compliant element with respect to standards for accessibility in the public right-ofway. It is the City’s intent to make all of its pedestrian infrastructure accessible by identifying the areas with the highest needs, the greatest use, and making those improvements in order of priority. The “corridor approach” is an effort to upgrade all pedestrian facilities in the public right-of-way by developing projects to address sections of public corridors such as greenways or streets with sidewalks in an organized fashion, based on the prioritization methodology described in Chapter 4. The corridors (sidewalks and greenway sections) are defined by roadway or greenway beginning and end points as shown in the project lists.
Image 25 / A Common Practice for Reviewing Infrastructure for ADA Compliance is a Detailed Inventory of Slope and Dimension of the Right-of-Way.
134 /// GAP Plan /
26
Image 26 / People with Disabilities Navigating Asheville’s Public Right-of-Way (Source: Janet Barlow).
Not all corridors are on the priority list; however all existing pedestrian facilities are in the ADA Transition plan. Additional details can be found in the accompanying ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan document. . The corridor approach plan and schedule to remove obstacles was developed methodically as follows: 1. Determine what corridors are most important to upgrade based on destination + equity, safety, connectivity, and public feedback. 2. Develop a schedule and plan with cost estimates to remove obstacles. 3. Upgrade corridors through a systematic process, described in more detail in the accompanying ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan document. The process includes: (i) Complete detailed ADA assessments and inventories for prioritized corridors in accordance with ADA Standards and PROWAG Guidance. (ii) Create and inventory and database updates of individual barriers and fully ADA compliant elements identified on each corridor. (iii) Develop a budget and scope of work for updating all non-compliant elements for each corridor to remove barriers. (iv) Complete project planning, design and construction to upgrade non-compliant elements to the maximum extent feasible.
(v) Remove compliant elements from the inventory of barriers. The benefits of this process are as follows: 1. Provides a methodical approach to upgrading key pedestrian corridors throughout the City based on a thorough prioritization process (including destination + equity, safety, connectivity and public input factor). 2. Includes input from community members with disabilities and considers needed corridor upgrades to remove barriers based on local needs. 3. Allows for methodical advanced planning for crossdepartment and interagency corridor projects in order to maximize implementation and ADA Transition Plan database updates. 4. Moves toward implementation faster (money and time for up front measurements can be spent on implementation). 5. Improves efficiency, as conditions along roadways deteriorate and may be in a different condition by the time any work is done. As such, detailed assessments will be current and not need to be repeated for a project that is programmed for a future year when conditions have changed. 6. Allows for cross-department and interagency coordination for advanced planning of ADA corridor projects that align with other infrastructure projects. This assists with maximizes the efficiency of implementation and ADA Transition Plan.
/
GAP Plan
/// 135
M O RE A B OUT T H E A DA The Americans with Disabilities Act, enacted on July 26, 1990, is a civil rights law prohibiting discrimination against individuals on the basis of disability. Title II of the ADA pertains to the programs, activities and services that public entities provide. As a provider of public transportation services and program, the City of Asheville must comply with this section of the Act as it specifically applies to public service agencies. Title II of the ADA provides that, “… no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity.” (42 USC. Sec. 12132; )
TH E A DA A ND I T S REL ATIO N SH I P TO OT H E R L AW S Title II of the ADA is a companion legislation to two previous federal statutes and regulations: • The Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 is a Federal law that requires Federal facilities that are designed, built, altered or leased with Federal funds be accessible. The Architectural Barriers Act marks one of the first efforts to ensure access to the built environment.
• Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 is a Federal law that protects qualified individuals from discrimination based on their disability. The nondiscrimination requirements of the law apply to employers and organizations that receive financial assistance from any Federal department or agency. Title II of the ADA extended this coverage to all state and local government entities, regardless of whether they receive federal funding or not.
What are the Proposed Public Right-ofWay Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG)? Even in 2022, the country is without established standards for accessibility in the public right-of-way. The United States Access Board is developing new guidelines under the Americans with Disabilities Act, called the PROWAG, that will address access to sidewalks and streets, crosswalks, curb ramps, pedestrian signals, on-street parking, and other components of public rights-of-way. These guidelines also review shared use paths, which are designed primarily for use by bicyclists and pedestrians for transportation and recreation purposes. The Access Board issued proposed guidelines for public comment. The Board is in the process of finalizing these guidelines. These guidelines are considered “best practice” until they are finalized and adopted by the Department of Justice and the Department of Transportation, when they become the new standard.
27
Image 27 / Art Installation Celebrating the 25th Anniversary of the ADA Law (Source: Tinkering Monkey)
136 /// GAP Plan /
EP T S
A DA TR A N S I T IO N PL A N P RO JEC T DE V E LO PME NT P RO C ES S ADA Priority Corridors were developed as follows:
Corridor Prioritization: Round 1
Step 1: Corridor Prioritization - Round 1 As described in Chapter 4, this corridor prioritization methodology scored streets in the City to determine the areas of greatest need based on the combination of three scores: destination + equity, safety and connectivity
Step 2: Corridor Prioritization - Round 2 (Public Feedback) In order to account for public concerns and reported issues with the pedestrian network, corridors received points based on public input received during the initial Broad Community Feedback Surveys in January 2021 and the Project Network Survey in the Fall of 2021, as described in Chapter 3 and Appendix 4. Map 22 outlines how the team assigned points after a detailed review of both public surveys.
EP T S Corridor Prioritization: Round 2 (Public Feedback)
EP T S
Step 3: Final Project Lists by Category After the corridor scoring was completed, roadways that scored more than 10 points (maximum score of 20 points) were further divided into two priority project lists based on roadway maintenance and ownership. These categories were developed to assist with identifying project development, funding partnerships and coordination needs.
Final Project Lists by Category
EP T S
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Roadways • Priority ADA Project Groups 1- 9 (See Map 23 and Table 13 for project list details).
Corridor Recommendations
City of Asheville (COA) Roadways • Priority ADA Project Groups 1-5 (See Map 24 and Table 14 for project list details) Note that all existing pedestrian facilities are included in the ADA Transition plan database as future corridors for barrier removal. Corridors not included in these lists will be prioritized during year 10 of the ADA Transition Plan, as an update to the schedule for barrier removal as detailed in the accompanying ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan document.
EP T S Round 3 Public Feedback
/
GAP Plan
/// 137
Step 4. Project Development & Recommendations
The dates of these focus groups were as follows:
After the public vetted the priority network, the team compiled project lists and evaluated each corridor to determine needed ADA and pedestrian improvements. From that review, each corridor received a project description and recommendations. The corridor evaluation and project development details are available in table format in Appendix 10.
• September 16th, 2021
For projects that have a combination of ADA Transition Plan elements (e.g., existing sidewalks and ramps) and Pedestrian Plan elements (e.g., sidewalk gaps and new crossings), the project descriptions were combined. This will allow for development of a complete project as each corridor is advanced into implementation. Even if these improvements are phased (not completed at the same time or under one project), a completed corridor requires implementation of both missing connections as well as upgrading existing facilities in order to ensure accessibility for all users. The project information included in the tables in Appendix 10 includes the following details on each corridor: • Funding and project development status • Recommended next steps for implementation • Prioritization next steps, where applicable • An ADA conditions scan • Order of magnitude cost estimates
Step 5. Public Input Round 3 The City collected a final round of public input in March 2022 which included an online survey and ADA Focus Group meetings. Additionally, the Think Tank Team, FBRMPO and the Citizens Advisory Committee met one final time which involved various City departments, NCDOT and Buncombe County representatives. More on ADA Focus Group Feedback and Priorities During Round 2 and Round 3 of public input for the Close the GAP Plan, the City hosted a series of virtual ADA Focus Group meetings. These small groups allowed for feedback on projects, priority corridors, as well as City policies that impact mobility for differently abled individuals moving about the City of Asheville.
138 /// GAP Plan /
• September 14th, 2021 • March 31, 2022 Several one-on-one meetings took place as well. Attendees included individuals with ambulatory impairments, wheelchair users, those with vision impairments (full and partial) as well as support organizations that provide services for individuals with disabilities. Although a few specific corridors were cited during Focus Group meetings, much of the discussion centered around key maintenance and policy issues that result in obstacles along the Pedestrian Access Routes (PARs) in the City. Focus Group and survey participants mentioned several key corridors in need of ADA upgrades. The top mentioned corridors are as follows (in order of most mentioned): 1. Merrimon Avenue 2. Haywood Road 3. Broadway Street (north of I-240) 4. Tunnel Road 5. Amboy Road 6. Fairview Road 7. Kenilworth Road Several corridors were mentioned frequently on the ADA survey that do not yet have full connections and therefore are part of the Pedestrian and Greenway plans, These corridors are as follows: 1. Leicester Highway – Pedestrian Plan 2. Swannanoa River Road – Pedestrian Plan 3. Johnston Boulevard 4. Sweeten Creek Road 5. Riverside Drive 6. Hominy Creek Road The ADA Focus Group feedback related to types of facilities that are desired as well as key maintenance and policy issues are summarized on the following two pages. More details and recommendations on these items are included in Chapter 9: Standards and Policy Recommendations.
1
Woodfin
Map 22. Public Input Score
Mile
Beaver Lake
Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis
NORTH
26
240 240 40
40
40
Biltmore Estate
Biltmore Forest
26
DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE PUBLIC INPUT POINT ASSIGNMENT
240
3 Points 2 Points
Lake Julian
1 Point Downtown Asheville City of Asheville Area Cities
AVL Regional Airport
0.5
Fletcher
Mills River
Miles
/
GAP Plan
/// 139
Quick Sheets #6:
Top ADA Focus Group Priorities: Facilities and Design Items
1
Provide pedestrian push buttons & audible pedestrian signals (most important in loud crowded areas)
2
Improve design, where feasible, for directional ramps (2 per corner vs. single corner ramp)
3
Correct steep sidewalk cross slopes at driveway aprons and minimize driveway curb cuts
4
Provide adequate audible and directional queues for roundabout crossings
28
29
Image 28 / Audible Push Buttons that are Properly Positioned are Essential for Individuals with Disabilities to be able to Cross Busy Streets. (Source: https://twitter.com/ nyc_dot/status/1286339567067463684?lang=gu) Image 29 / Example of Preferred Curb Ramp Configuration for Individuals in Wheelchairs and with Vision Impairments. (Source: Colorado DOT “Curb Ramp Designers Resource” Version 1.3) Image 30 / Example of Steep Driveway Cross Slope on Tunnel Road. Anything Over 2% is Non-compliant and can be a Barrier for Travel. Image 31 / Roundabout Crossings are Challenging for Those with Vision Impairments; Treatments such as Signals and Flashing Beacons with Audible Messages can Help. (Source: https://carmanah.com)
140 /// GAP Plan /
30
31
Quick Sheets #7:
Top ADA Focus Group Priorities: Maintenance and Policy Items
1
Maintain accessible routes through temporary work zones
2
Remove permanent obstacles in sidewalks such as utility poles
3
Fix sidewalks in poor repair
4
Improve drainage at curb ramps to prevent water ponding and gravel build up
5 6
34
32
33
40
35
Enforce policies that keep temporary obstacles off the Pedestrian Access Route (PAR) such as trash can, signs, snow removal and vegetation overgrowth
Maintain vertical requirements for PAR for cane usage and to prevent injury
37 Image 32 / Example of Temporary Ramp used to Maintain Access through a Temporary Work Zone. (Source Oregon DOT) Image 33 / Example of Utility Poles and Other Obstacles in PAR Merrimon Avenue. Image 34 / Example of a Sidewalk in Poor Repair that Creates and Obstacle. Image 35 / Example of Curb Ramp on Charlotte Street in Need of Better Drainage. Image 36 / Signs in the Sidewalk Create an Obstacle on Merrimon Avenue. Image 37 / Vertical Clearance Requirements Ensure Visually Impaired Pedestrians can Navigate without Injury. (Source: https://www.access-board.gov/ada/ guides/chapter-3-protruding-objects/)
/
GAP Plan
/// 141
More on the ADA Conditions Scan For each corridor, the team completed a desktop scan to identify existing condition information available through published maps, photos, local knowledge and geographic information system (GIS) databases. These reviews included an initial “high level” assessment that indicates the prevalence and severity of accessibility barriers within the Pedestrian Access Route (PAR) including transit stops, parking and signals.. This rating database should be updated as corridors are fully assessed during the planning and scoping phase and then updated again as projects are completed and documented as ADA compliant, thus allowing the barriers to be removed from the ADA Transition Plan. The ratings are as follows:
determine cost estimates for the ADA Transition Plan (see Accompanying Document: ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan). The City can use these ratings as a tool when deciding which corridors to program during regular cycles of capital project programming. For example, when a list of ADA projects is considered for an upcoming capital improvement cycle and one is a high priority corridor with a conditions rating of 2 (Good Condition), it may be shifted down on the project list to accommodate a slightly lower priority project with a conditions rating of 5 (Poor Condition).
Detailed Assessments During Corridor Implementation
1. Fully compliant.
During implementation, the City’s first task will be to perform a detailed ADA assessment and develop a project scope of work for each corridor.
2. Good condition: needs compliance review to verify. 3. Fair condition: needs ADA upgrades in spots (specific locations).
The detailed ADA assessment for scoping will include identifying barriers and obstacles for repair. ADA elements should be inventoried using a detailed ADA checklist that should be developed in accordance with ADA Standards and PROWAG Guidance. These elements should include the following*:
4. Moderate condition: needs many ADA upgrades. 5. Poor condition: needs significant ADA upgrades (full sidewalk reconstruction for much of the corridor).
• Curb ramps and crossings
Note that no corridors were assigned a rating of 1 (fully compliant) since corridor assessments have not been completed and all corridors remain on the Transition Plan. The rating system was used to
38
• Sidewalk cracks and gaps • Sidewalk cross slopes • Vertical and horizontal encroachments in the
39
Image 38 / Curb Ramp Elements (Source: Virginia Transportation Research Council) Image 39 / Watauga Street in Montford is an Example of a Sidewalk with an ADA Condition Rating of 5 - In Poor Condition.
142 /// GAP Plan /
Pedestrian Access Route (PAR must be kept clear per height and width requirements) • Accessible signals and push button placement • Excessive cross slopes at driveway openings openings • Audible crossing features at roundabouts & free flowing right turns • Accessible on-street parking needs • Transit stop accessibility • Location-specific maintenance and policy needs (what is needed to keep pedestrian access route clear (e.g., future utility work, inadequate repairs, trash cans, vegetation)
• •After 20 years, 50% of accessibility features will be ADA compliant to the maximum extent feasible. • After 30 years, 75% of accessibility features will be ADA compliant to the maximum extent feasible. • After 40 years, 100% of accessibility features will be ADA compliant to the maximum extent feasible. Section 5.0 of the Accompanying Document: ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan includes a more detailed implementation plan and schedule for removing physical infrastructure barriers and deficiencies in policies and procedures.
*This is not and exhaustive list. All construction must meet the current federal regulations to ensure that corridors are fully accessible. Post assessment, all elements that are fully ADA compliant may be removed from the ADA Transition Plan. These elements should be documented and maintained on a City database with corridor assessment results and transition plan progress. More on Implementation and Barrier Removal The City of Asheville is committed to eliminating accessibility barriers for individuals with disabilities within its public rights-of-way. As required under 28 CFR 35.150(d)(3), the City must specify a schedule for taking necessary steps to achieve ADA compliance. In addition to ADA Corridor projects, barrier removal will be accomplished over the next 40 years through the following methods. • Capital Improvement Projects (to include Corridor Projects in future years) • Street resurfacing • NCDOT projects • Developer activity • Utilities and other work done under a permit • Grants and Partnerships Below is a summary of the schedule for barrier removal for pedestrian facilities within the City of Asheville’s public rights-of-way: • After 10 years, 25% of accessibility features will be ADA compliant to the maximum extent feasible.
ADA STANDARDS: Please visit to learn more: https://www.ada. gov/2010ADAstandards_index.htm
/
GAP Plan
/// 143
1
Woodfin
Map 23. NCDOT: Priority ADA Project Groups 1 - 9
Beaver Lake
Mile
NORTH
6.D 9.I
26
Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis
4.F 5.H
9.B 2.E 4.H
8.D
3.G
4.I
240
6.F
2.D 6.E 3.E 2.C 4.G 7.B 4.A 8.C 4.C 7.A 5.A 6.B 9.L
5.I
8.E 8.A
9.A
9.J 3.F
40
9.K
40
3.B 3.A240 5.B
Biltmore Estate
40
9.C
9.M 9.D 9.E 9.F 5.C 4.E
2.B
4.J
4.D
8.B
1.A
3.C
2.A 4.B 8.G
6.A
6.C
Biltmore Forest
2.A 9.M 8.G 4.B 9.E 9.F 9.D
26
3.D
DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE
6.E
NCDOT: ADA PROJECTS
240
3.E
2.C 8.C
5.C
8.F
2.D
4.G
Biltmore Forest
9.G
7.B
5.E
5.A
Groups 1 and 2
5.D 9.H
Groups 3 and 4
Lake Julian
Groups 5 and 6 Groups 7 and 8 Group 9
4.A
Downtown Asheville
5.F
City of Asheville Area Cities
5.G
7.A
6.B
9.L 4.B
144 /// GAP Plan /
4.C
AVL Regional Airport
2.A
0.5
Mills River
Miles
Fletcher
Table 13. NCDOT: Priority ADA Project Groups 1 - 9 Map ID # 1.A 2.A 2.B 2.C 2.D 2.E 3.A 3.B 3.C 3.D 3.E 3.F 3.G 4.A 4.B 4.C 4.D 4.E 4.F 4.G 4.H 4.I 4.J 5.A 5.B 5.C 5.D 5.E 5.F
Segment
Total Score
Tunnel Rd. Biltmore Ave. Fairview Rd. (Alt US 74) Merrimon Ave. (US 25) Merrimon Ave. (US 25) Patton Ave. (US 19/23; Alt US 74) Tunnel Rd. Tunnel Rd. Tunnel Rd. Hendersonville Rd. (US 25)
New Haw Creek Rd. to Porters Cove Rd. Southside Ave. to Thompson St.
19 18
Swannanoa River Rd. to School Rd.
18
I-240 Interchange
18
Planned (MTP)
I-240 to WT Weaver Blvd.
18
Planned (MTP)
Rock Hill Rd to NC 280
17
Study Complete
Charlotte St.
I-240 Interchange
17
Planned (MTP) Fund Short Term ADA Upgrades
Sand Hill Rd. to Old Haywood Rd.
17
Road Name
Smokey Park Hwy. (US 19/23; Alt US 74) Patton Ave. (US 19/23; Alt US 74) Biltmore Ave. (US 25) McDowell St. (US 25) S. Charlotte St. Hendersonville Rd. (US 25) Hendersonville Rd. (US 25) Merrimon Ave. (US 25) Broadway St. Haywood Rd. Haywood Rd. Sweeten Creek Rd. (Alt US 25) Broadway St. S. Tunnel Rd. Hendersonville Rd. (US 25) Long Shoals Rd. (NC 146) Long Shoals Rd. (NC 146) Airport Rd. (NC 280)
Johnston Blvd./Haywood Rd. to I-240 Interchange Chunns Cove to S. Tunnel Rd. Tunnel Rd. to Chunns Cove Rd. I-240 Interchange
18 17 Grouped 17
Funding Status Planned (MTP) Study Complete
Bond Funded (Partial for Sidewalk Gaps) Study Complete Study Complete Study Complete
Old Haywood Rd. to Johnston Blvd./ Haywood Rd. Patton Ave. to Hilliard Ave. Entire St. I-240 to Biltmore Ave.
17
Planned (MTP)
16 16 16
Study Complete
I-40 to Rock Hill Rd.
16
Planned (MTP)
I-40 Interchange
16
WT Weaver Blvd to Beaverdam Rd.
16
Planned (MTP)
I-240 Interchange Sand Hill Rd. to Patton Ave. I-240 to Sand Hill Rd.
16 16 16
Planned (MTP) Funded (NCDOT# HL-0003) Funded (NCDOT# HL-0003)
Crayton Rd. to Rock Hill Rd.
16
Planned (MTP)
Patton Ave. to I-240 Entire St.
15 15
Study Complete
Biltmore Ave. to I-40
15
Hendersonville Rd. to Overlook Dr
15
Schenck Parkway to Overlook Dr
15
Watson Rd. to Hendersonville Rd.
15
Bond Funded for North Side; Planned (MTP) for Remaining
/
GAP Plan
/// 145
1
Woodfin
Map 23. NCDOT: Priority ADA Project Groups 1 - 9 (continued)
Beaver Lake
6.D 9.I 4.F
5.H
9.B 2.E 4.H
8.D
3.G
4.I
240
6.F
2.D 6.E 3.E 2.C 4.G 7.B 4.A 8.C 4.C 7.A 5.A 6.B 9.L
5.I
8.E 8.A
9.A
9.J 3.F
40
3.B 3.A240
Biltmore Estate
1.A
5.B
40
9.C
9.M 9.D 9.E 9.F 5.C 4.E
2.B
4.J
4.D
8.B
6.C 3.C
2.A 4.B 8.G
6.A
9.K
NORTH
26
Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis
40
Mile
Biltmore Forest
2.A 9.M 8.G 4.B 9.E 9.F 9.D
26
3.D
DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE
6.E
NCDOT: ADA PROJECTS
240
3.E
2.C 8.C
5.C
8.F
2.D
4.G
Biltmore Forest
9.G
7.B
5.E
5.A
Groups 1 and 2
5.D 9.H
Groups 3 and 4
Lake Julian
Groups 5 and 6 Groups 7 and 8 Group 9
4.A
4.C
Downtown Asheville
5.F
City of Asheville Area Cities
5.G
7.A
6.B
9.L 4.B
146 /// GAP Plan /
AVL Regional Airport
2.A
0.5
Mills River
Miles
Fletcher
Table 13. NCDOT: Priority ADA Project Groups 1 - 9 (continued) Map ID #
Road Name
5.G
Airport Rd. (NC 280)
5.H 5.I 6.A 6.B 6.C 6.D 6.E 6.F 7.A 7.B 8.A 8.B 8.C 8.D 8.E 8.F 8.G 9.A 9.B 9.C 9.D 9.E 9.F 9.G 9.H 9.I 9.J 9.K 9.L 9.M
Segment
Town of Fletcher Boundary WT Weaver Blvd. to I-26 Broadway St. Interchange Haywood Rd. Beverly Rd. west to I-240 I-240 to Stradley Mountain Rd./ Brevard Rd. (NC 191) Ridgefield Blvd. Biltmore Ave. (US 25) Southside Ave. to Hilliard Ave. New Haw Creek Rd. Arco Rd. to Beverly Rd. Merrimon Ave. (US Beaverdam Rd. to Wembley Rd. 25) Broadway St. I-240 to WT Weaver Blvd. Beverly Rd. west to Roberts St./ Haywood Rd. Clingman Ave. traffic circle Clingman Ave. Entire St. College St. & Tunnel Charlotte St. to Beaucatcher Tunnel Rd. Brevard Rd. (NC 191) I-240 to Haywood Rd. Sardis Rd. (NC 112) Country Meadows Dr. to Sand Hill Rd. Montford Ave. I-240 Interchange Louisiana Ave. Haywood Rd. to Patton Ave. Sand Hill Rd. Wendover Rd. to Haywood Rd. Hendersonville Rd. to Alpine Ridge Mills Gap Rd. Dr. Swannanoa River Rd. One Way to Bryson St. Amboy Rd. Bridge French Broad River Bridge Patton Ave. to north of Hazel Mill N. Louisiana Ave. Rd. Wood Ave. Swannanoa River Rd. to Future St. All Souls Crescent McDowell St. to Hendersonville Rd. (US 25) Brooke & Lodge St. Entire St. Thompson St. to Hendersonville Rd. Biltmore Ave. US 25 Overlook Dr NC 146 to Springside Rd. Rosscraggon Rd. & Entire St. Rathfarnham Rd. Beaverdam Rd. Merrimon Ave. to Kimberly Ave. Amboy Rd. Entire St. Sand Hill Rd. (NC 112) Lake Dr. to Sardis Rd. Southside Ave. (US Entire St. 25) Biltmore Ave. to Swannanoa River Bryson St. (US 81) Rd.
Total Score
Funding Status
15
Planned (MTP)
15
Partially Funded (NCDOT# BL-0005)
15
Funded (NCDOT# HL-0003)
14 14 14 14
Planned (MTP)
14
Planned (MTP)
14 13 13 12 12 12 12 12
Funded (NCDOT# U-6047)
12
Funded (NCDOT# U-5834)
12 11
Funded (NCDOT# U-4739)
11
Funded (NCDOT# U-6162)
11 11
Study Complete
11
Study Complete
11
Study Complete
11 11 11 11 11
Funded (NCDOT# U-4739)
11 11
Funded (NCDOT# U-6046/5832)
/
GAP Plan
/// 147
1
Woodfin
Map 24. COA: Priority ADA Project Groups 1 - 5
Mile
Beaver Lake
4.G
26
Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis
NORTH
5.Q 5.R
4.H
4.I 3.D
5.O 3.A 240
5.N
5.J 5.K
5.P
240
4.J 40
5.L
4.E 5.M
40
4.F
5.T
4.K
5.S
40
5.A Biltmore Estate
Biltmore Forest
26
DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE COA: ADA PROJECTS Group 1
4.H 4.C 2.B 5.R
5.B
5.C
5.F
5.H 5.G 4.B 1.A
5.E
Group 2 Lake Julian
4.L
Group 3 Group 4
4.D
3.D
Group 5
2.A
Downtown Asheville
3.C
5.I
City of Asheville
4.A
3.A
Area Cities
5.D
5.N
3.B
AVL Regional Airport
0.5 5.K
148 /// GAP Plan /
Mills River
Miles
Fletcher
Table 14. COA: Priority ADA Project Groups 1 - 5 Map ID #
Road Name
1.A
Patton Ave.
2.A 2.B 3.A
Lexington Ave. Haywood St. Hilliard Ave.
3.B
Asheland Ave.
3.C 3.D 4.A 4.B
Asheland Ave. Valley St. Church St. Battery Park Ave. Woodfin & Oak Streets College St. Livingston St. Hospital Dr. Lakeshore Dr. Montford Ave. Chestnut St. Kenilworth Rd. Fairview Rd. College St. Shiloh Rd. Battle Square Walnut St. Coxe Ave. Wall St. O'Henry Ave. Otis St. N French Broad Ave. S French Broad Ave.
4.C 4.D 4.E 4.F 4.G 4.H 4.I 4.J 4.K 4.L 5.A 5.B 5.C 5.D 5.E 5.F 5.G 5.H 5.I 5.J 5.K 5.L 5.M 5.N 5.O 5.P 5.Q 5.R 5.S 5.T
Segment Clingman Ave./Haywood St. to Biltmore Ave.
Total Score 18
Entire St. Entire St. Entire St. Hilliard Ave. to Phifer St./Southside Ave. Patton Ave. to Hilliard Ave. College St. to Hazzard St. Entire St. Entire St.
15 15 14
Entire St.
13
Patton Ave. to Spruce St. Entire St. Entire St. Shorewood Dr. to Merrimon Ave. Entire St. Merrimon Ave. to Broadway St. Tunnel Rd. to Pickwick Rd. Sweeten Creek Rd. to School Rd. Charlotte St. to Spruce St. Entire St. Entire St. Entire St. Entire St. Entire St. Entire St. Entire St. Entire St. Patton Ave. to Hilliard Ave. Lyman St./Clingman Ave. Ext north to Roberts St. traffic circle Livingston St. to Lyman St./ Depot St. Clingman Ave. Ext Victoria Rd. Hospital Dr. to Fernihurst Dr. Victoria Rd. Fernihurst Dr. to Meadow Rd. S French Broad Ave. Hilliard Ave. to Livingston St. Riverside Dr. I-240 to I-26 Ramp State St. Entire St. Murdock Ave. Entire St. Hill St. Montford Ave. to Atkinson St. Wood Ave. & Cedar St. Wood Ave. and Cedar St. Short McDowell St. Meadow Rd. to McDowell St.
Funding Status Planned Repaving Project (Includes ADA) Planned Protected Bike Lane Project (College St. to Biltmore Ave.) Partially Funded (NCDOT# EB-5830)
14 14 14 12 12
12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11
Partially Funded (NCDOT# EB-5831)
11 11
Partially Funded (Neighborhood Greenway)
11 11 11 12 11 11 11 11 11
/
GAP Plan
/// 149
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
7
THE PEDESTRIAN PLAN (P) RESULTS
“
It’s the neighborhood and the people that make the walk enjoyable.” - Downtown Resident
7
THE PEDESTRIAN PLAN (P) R E S U LT S
Step 2: Corridor Prioritization - Round 2 (Public Feedback) In order to account for public concerns and reported issues with the pedestrian network, corridors received points based on public input received during the initial Broad Community Feedback Surveys in January 2021 and the Project Network Survey in the Fall of 2021, as described in Chapter 3 and Appendix 4. Map 25 outlines how the team assigned points after a detailed review of both public surveys.
The Pedestrian Plan is a guiding document that provides a clear and transparent path to extending new pedestrian facilities that will create a safe, cohesive and connected system for users of abilities.
P RO JEC T I DE NT I FIC AT ION The Close the GAP Pedestrian Plan goal is to identify top priorities for the following: 1. New sidewalks and sidewalk improvements, such as widening or better separation from traffic. 2. Intersection and mid-block pedestrian crossing improvements.
Image 40 / The City Maintains Most Streets in Downtown Asheville like Haywood Street and Battery Park Avenue.
40
One of the most important purposes of this effort is to provide guidance for City officials and local stakeholders as they make decisions on where to fund construction of new facilities. This plan developed this guidance through the following steps:
Step 1: Corridor Prioritization - Round 1 As described in Chapter 4, this corridor prioritization methodology scored streets in the City to determine the areas of greatest need based on the combination of three scores: destination + equity, connectivity and safety.
/ GAP Plan /// 153
EP T S
Step 3: Final Project Lists by Category
Corridor Prioritization: Round 1
After the corridor scoring was completed, roadways that scored greater than 10 points out of 20 maximum points were further divided into two priority project lists based on roadway maintenance and ownership. These categories were developed to assist with identifying project development and funding partnerships and coordination needs. North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
S
TEP
• Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1- 9 (See Map 26 and Table 15 for project list details). City of Asheville (COA) Roadways
Corridor Prioritization: Round 2 (Public Feedback)
• Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1-5 (See Map 27 and Table 16 for project list details)
Step 4: Project Development & Recommendations
S
TEP Final Project Lists by Category
S
TEP
After the public vetted the priority network, the team compiled project lists and evaluated each corridor to determine needed ADA and pedestrian improvements. From that review, each corridor received a project description and recommendations. Examples of the pedestrian plan recommendations that were considered are as follows: • Complete missing sidewalk sections • Provide connections to transit stops • Improve safety at pedestrian crossings • Increase frequency of pedestrian crossings • Widen sidewalks and/or provide separation from traffic
Corridor Recommendations
EP T S Round 3 Public Feedback
154 /// GAP Plan /
• Multi-use sidepaths were included in some instances where the corridor is part of a planned bicycle route or has previously identified bicycle needs. This is not an exhaustive list of pedestrian facility design needs. For more information, see More on Pedestrian Facility Section at the end of this chapter. Projects with ADA Transition Plan elements (e.g., existing sidewalks and ramps) and Pedestrian Plan elements (e.g., sidewalk gaps and new crossings) have combined project descriptions, which allows City staff to design a complete project as each corridor is advanced into implementation. Completing a pedestrian corridor requires the City to develop
41
42
Image 41 / A Pedestrian Crossing at a Location with a Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) (Source: Texas Transportation Institute) Image 42 / Some of Asheville’s Busiest Corridors, like Tunnel Road, have a Myriad of Overlapping Land Use, Safety and Transportation Needs that Require a Detailed Study.
missing connections identified in the Pedestrian Plan, as well as upgrading existing facilities identified in the ADA Transition Plan. The City has the option to complete corridors under one project or using a phased approach. In addition to the corridor assessment and recommended improvements, a project database was developed for tracking progress, funding and next steps. Some projects are already in process. As such, the database contains the following information.: • Funding and project development status • Recommended next step for implementation • Prioritization of next steps, where applicable The final recommendations were vetted through NCDOT and various City departments to evaluate overlapping capital needs that could impact the timeline and prioritization for the project.
Step 5: Public Input Round 3 A final round of public input was conducted in March of 2022 which included an online survey, ADA focus group meetings, a Citizens Advisory Committee meeting as well as a project Think Tank Team meeting involving various City departments, FBRMPO, NCDOT and Buncombe County representatives.
/
GAP Plan
/// 155
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
156 /// GAP Plan /
1
Woodfin
Map 25. 2. Example Public Input Score
Mile
Beaver Lake
Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis
NORTH
26
240 240 40
40
40
Biltmore Estate
Biltmore Forest
26
DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE PUBLIC INPUT POINT ASSIGNMENT
240
3 Points 2 Points
Lake Julian
1 Point Downtown Asheville City of Asheville Area Cities
AVL Regional Airport
0.5
Fletcher
Mills River
Miles
157 /// GAP Plan /
/
GAP Plan
/// 157
1
Woodfin
Map 26. NCDOT: Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1 - 9
Beaver Lake
Mile 6.D
26
Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis
2.C 8.D
5.C 6.C
7.B 8.C
2.B 7.A
2.A
4.E 9.E
9.L
9.C
40
9.B 6.B
8.H 8.G 7.C
5.G
8.F
9.D
240
9.A
240
3.C
40
7.D
4.D 3.F
1.A 7.E
3.D
NORTH
6.A
5.A
40
8.A 2.D
9.K 9.J
5.B
5.F 4.B
4.A
4.C
6.E
1.B
5.A
6.A 8.A
8.E
Biltmore Estate
Biltmore Forest
9.I 3.B
4.E 9.J 9.K
26
3.E
DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE
6.C
9.H
2.B
Biltmore Forest
8.B 3.A
NCDOT: PEDESTRIAN PROJECTS Groups 1 and 2
9.G
7.A
5.F
Groups 3 and 4
Lake Julian
Groups 5 and 6 Groups 7 and 8 Group 9
5.E
Downtown Asheville City of Asheville
5.D
AVL Regional Airport
9.A
0.5 4.E
158 /// GAP Plan /
Mills River
Miles
9.F
Area Cities
Fletcher
Table 15. NCDOT: Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1 - 9 Map ID #
Road Name
Segment
Total Score
Funding Status
1.A
Leicester Hwy.
Patton Ave. to Old County Home Rd.
19
Funded (NCDOT# U-5190) Note: Overlapping Access Management Project (NCDOT# U-5972)
1.B
Tunnel Rd.
New Haw Creek Rd. to Porters Cove Rd.
19
Planned (MTP)
2.A
Patton Ave.
Johnston Blvd./Haywood Rd. to I-240 Interchange
18
Bond Funded (Partial for Sidewalk Gaps)
2.B
Merrimon Ave.
I-240 to WT. Weaver Blvd.
18
Planned (MTP)
2.C
Merrimon Ave.
WT Weaver Blvd. to Beaverdam Rd.
Grouped
Planned (MTP)
2.D
Fairview Rd.
Swannanoa River Rd. to School Rd.
18
3.A
Sweeten Creek Rd.
NC 280 to City Limit
17
Funded (NCDOT# U-2801A)
3.B
Sweeten Creek Rd.
Just south of Edgewood Rd. Ext to Blue Ridge Parkway
17
Funded (NCDOT# U-2801A)
3.C
Patton Ave.
Old Haywood Rd. to Johnston Blvd./Haywood Rd.
17
Planned (MTP)
3.D
Smokey Park Hwy.
Sand Hill Rd. to Old Haywood Rd.
17
3.E
Hendersonville Rd.
Rock Hill Rd. to NC 280
17
Study Complete
3.F
Tunnel Rd.
Chunns Cove to S. Tunnel Rd.
17
Study Complete
4.A
Sweeten Creek Rd.
Crayton Rd. to Rock Hill Rd.
16
Planned (MTP)
4.B
Hendersonville Rd.
I-40 Interchange
16
4.C
Hendersonville Rd.
I-40 to Rock Hill Rd.
16
Planned (MTP)
4.D
Tunnel Rd.
Tunnel Rd. to Chunns Cove Rd.
16
Study Complete
4.E
McDowell St.
Entire St.
16
Study Complete
5.A
Swannanoa River Rd. Bryson St. to Highway 70
15
Funded (NCDOT# U-6046/5832)
5.B
Sweeten Creek Rd.
Brook St. to Crayton Rd.
15
Planned (MTP)
5.C
Broadway St.
WT Weaver Blvd. to I-26 Interchange
15
Partially Funded (NCDOT# BL0005)
5.D
Airport Rd.
Watson Rd. to I-26 Ramps
15
Planned (MTP)
5.E
Airport Rd.
Watson Rd. to Hendersonville Rd.
15
Bond Funded for North Side; Planned (MTP) for Remaining
5.F
Hendersonville Rd.
Biltmore Ave. to I-40
15
5.G
S. Tunnel Rd.
Entire St.
15
Study Complete
6.A
Meadow Rd.
Entire St.
14
Funded (NCDOT# U-4739)
6.B
Sand Hill Rd.
Smoky Park Hwy. to Lake Dr.
14
Funded (NCDOT# U-6037)
6.C
Broadway St.
I-240 to WT Weaver Blvd.
14
Planned (MTP)
6.D
Merrimon Ave.
Beaverdam Rd to Wembley Rd
14
Planned (MTP)
6.E
Brevard Rd.
I-240 to Stradley Mountain Rd./ Ridgefield Blvd.
14
/
GAP Plan
/// 159
Map 26. NCDOT: Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1 - 9 (continued) Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis
160 /// GAP Plan /
Table 15. NCDOT: Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1 -9 (continued) Map ID #
Road Name
7.A
College St. & Tunnel Rd.
Charlotte St. to Beaucatcher Tunnel
13
7.B
Riverside Dr.
I-26 Ramp to Broadway St.
13
7.C
New Haw Creek Rd.
Tunnel Rd. to Arco Rd.
13
7.D
Chunns Cove Rd. & Piney Mountain Rd.
Tunnel Rd. to Bella Vista Retirement
13
7.E
Johnston Blvd.
Patton Ave. to Cedar Hill Rd.
13
8.A
Swannanoa River Rd. One Way to Bryson St.
8.B
Mills Gap Rd.
8.C
Old County Home Rd. Entire St.
12
8.D
Broadway St.
I-26 Interchange
12
Funded (NCDOT# BL-0005)
8.E
Sardis Rd.
Country Meadows Dr. to Sand Hill Rd.
12
Funded (NCDOT# U-6047)
8.F
Brevard Rd.
I-240 to Haywood Rd.
12
8.G
New Haw Creek Rd. & Middlebrook Rd.
Old Haw Creek Rd. to Tunnel Rd.
12
8.H
New Haw Creek Rd
Beverly Rd. to Bell Rd.
12
9.A
Southside Ave.
Entire St.
11
9.B
Sand Hill Rd.
Sardis Rd. to Sand Hill School Rd./ W. Oakview Rd.
11
9.C
Sand Hill Rd.
Sand Hill School Rd./W. Oakview Rd. to Wendover Rd.
11
9.D
Sand Hill School Rd.
Entire St.
11
9.E
Amboy Rd.
Entire St.
11
Funded (NCDOT# U-4739)
9.F
Airport Rd .
Ferncliff Park Dr. to Airport Park Rd.
11
Planned (MTP)
9.G
Rosscraggon Rd. & Rathfarnham Rd.
Entire St.
11
9.H
Overlook Dr.
Springside Rd. to Hendersonville Rd.
11
9.I
Rock Hill Rd.
Entire St.
11
Planned (MTP)
9.J
Biltmore Ave.
Thompson St. to Hendersonville Rd. US 25
11
Study Complete
9.K
All Souls Crescent
McDowell St. to Hendersonville Rd.
11
Study Complete
9.L
Amboy Rd. Bridge
French Broad River Bridge
11
Funded (NCDOT# U-4739)
Segment
Hendersonville Rd. to Alpine Ridge Dr.
Total Score
Funding Status
Funded (NCDOT# I-2513D)
Funded (NCDOT# EB-5944)
12 12
Funded (NCDOT# U-5834)
Bond Funded
/
GAP Plan
/// 161
1
Woodfin
Map 27. COA: Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1 - 4
Mile
Beaver Lake
NORTH
4.G 26
Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis
4.H 3.D 4.I 1.A
3.J
2.A 2.B
4.C
3.C
240
4.D 4.M
40
40
4.B 3.A
240
3.H 3.B
40
4.E
4.F 4.L
3.I 3.E
4.K
3.F
4.A 3.G Biltmore Estate
Biltmore Forest
26
DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE
4.J
240
3.D
COA: PEDESTRIAN PROJECTS Group 1 Group 2
Lake Julian
Group 3 Group 4
4.I
Downtown Asheville
1.A 2.A
City of Asheville Area Cities
3.A 4.B
AVL Regional Airport
0.5 4.D
162 /// GAP Plan /
Mills River
Miles
Fletcher
Table 16. COA: Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1 - 4 Map ID #
Road Name
Segment
Total Score
Funding Status Partially Funded (NCDOT# EB-5830)
1.A
Lexington Ave.
Entire St.
15
2.A
Hilliard Ave.
Entire St.
14
2.B
Deaverview Rd.
Pisgah View Rd. to Patton Ave.
14
3.A
Church St.
Entire St.
12
3.B
Livingston St.
Entire St.
12
3.C
N. Bear Creek Rd.
Entire St.
12
3.D
Montford Ave.
Entire St.
12
3.E
London Rd.
Entire St.
12
3.F
Caribou Rd.
Entire St.
12
3.G
West Chapel Rd.
Entire St.
12
3.H
Kenilworth Rd.
Tunnel Rd. to Pickwick Rd.
12
3.I
Fairview Rd.
Sweeten Creek Rd. to School Rd.
12
3.J
Emma Rd.
Craven St./Hazel Mill Rd. to Bingham Rd.
12
4.A
Shiloh Rd.
Entire St.
11
4.B
Coxe Ave.
Entire St.
11
4.C
Roberts St.
Lyman St./Clingman Ave Ext to W. Haywood Street (Grouped Project)
11
4.D
Depot St.
Livingston St. to Lyman St/ Clingman Ave. Ext
11
4.E
Victoria Rd.
Hospital Dr. to Fernihurst Dr.
11
4.F
Victoria Rd.
Fernihurst Dr. to Meadow Rd.
11
4.G
Lakeshore Dr.
Elkwood Ave. to Shorewood Dr.
11
4.H
Murdock Ave.
Entire St.
11
4.I
Hill St.
Montford Ave. to Atkinson St.
11
4.J
Springside Rd.
Entire St.
11
4.K
Wood Ave. and Cedar St.
Wood Ave. and Cedar St.
11
4.L
Short McDowell St.
Meadow Rd. to McDowell St.
11
4.M
Oakland Rd.
Entire St.
11
Funded (NCDOT# EB-5965)
Partially Funded (NCDOT# EB-5831)
Partially Funded (Neighborhood Greenway)
/
GAP Plan
/// 163
M O RE O N PE DE S T R I A N FAC IL IT Y SE L EC T IO N The focus of this section is to provide resources and guidance to consider during the planning and design phase of the Close the GAP pedestrian projects. The pedestrian component of a street design is one of many components that should be balanced when developing a complete street, where all users can move safety and efficiently.
Competing Needs and Complete Streets Resources The following graphic indicates the many components a community must balance when evaluating a complete street cross section for an urban street similar to many streets in Asheville.
This balancing act can be most challenging when project managers are considering design modifications along existing corridors in urban contexts with limited rights-of-way, like Tunnel or Hendersonville Roads. Given the many competing elements along each street, within the public rightof-way, the process for selection of the final cross section of a street is nuanced and should be based on planning and engineering studies that consider land use, traffic context and user demands, as well as safety and comfort needs. A concept that emphasizes this point is that of 8-80 cities1: building cities that are great for an 8-yearold and an 80-year-old. If streets are comfortable for these baseline age groups, then they should be accessible, low stress and comfortable for all user types.
Figure 22. Components of Complete Streets (Source: Philadelphia Complete Streets Design Handbook).
164 /// GAP Plan /
Resources for Complete Streets
USDOT ON COMPLETE STREETS Complete Streets are streets designed and operated to enable safe use and support mobility for all users. Those include people of all ages and abilities, regardless of whether they are traveling as drivers, pedestrians, bicyclists, or public transportation riders. The concept of Complete Streets encompasses many approaches to planning, designing, and operating roadways and rights of way with all users in mind to make the transportation network safer and more efficient. Complete Streets policies are set at the state, regional, and local levels and are frequently supported by roadway design guidelines. Complete Streets approaches vary based on community context. They may address a wide range of elements, such as sidewalks, bicycle lanes, bus lanes, public transportation stops, crossing opportunities, median islands, accessible pedestrian signals, curb extensions, modified vehicle travel lanes, streetscape, and landscape treatments. Complete Streets reduce motor vehicle-related crashes and pedestrian risk, as well as bicyclist risk when well-designed bicycle-specific infrastructure is included (Reynolds, 2009). They can promote walking and bicycling by providing safer places to achieve physical activity through transportation. One study found that 43% of people reporting a place to walk were significantly more likely to meet current recommendations for regular physical activity than were those reporting no place to walk (Powell, Martin, Chowdhury, 2003).
There are many resources existing for planners and designers to reference when selecting pedestrian facilities. . Three comprehensive complete street resources include: • Complete Streets - Institute of Transportation Engineers (https://www.ite.org/technical-resources/ topics/complete-streets/) • National Complete Streets Coalition (https:// smartgrowthamerica.org/program/nationalcomplete-streets-coalition/) • Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center (PBIC) (https://www.pedbikeinfo.org/topics/ completestreets.cfm) In early 2022, NCDOT’s Integrated Mobility Division (IMD) introduced its new Complete Streets Project Evaluation Methodology (PEM). which provides planners and designers with additional guidance on facility selection and balancing needs within the public right-of-way. IMD’s new PEM is directed toward facility selection during NCDOT project development. Ideally, it will help the City define project feasibility and cost trade-offs for various complete streets needs developed in partnership with NCDOT. However, PEM is not only useful when NCDOT is upgrading roadways within the City. It will also provide useful tools for the City to consider when updating the Unified Development Ordinance and Standard Specifications and Details Manual, as is discussed in Chapter 9.
Source: https://www.transportation.gov/mission/ health/complete-streets#:~:text=Complete%20 Streets%20are%20streets%20 designed,bicyclists%2C%20or%20public%20 transportation%20riders.
/
GAP Plan
/// 165
Quick Sheets #8:
Key Elements of NCDOT Complete Streets Project Evaluation Methodology
NCDOT’s new Project Evaluation Methodology (PEM) aids in the evaluation of complete street projects using a five stage process: 1. Initial Screening and Data Input 2. Transportation Need Determination 3. Facility Type Selection 4. Impact Assessment 5. Final Analysis. Figure 23 was developed by NCDOT and displays the five-stage planning process.
TO LEARN MORE: Please visit: https://connect.ncdot.gov/ projects/BikePed/Documents/Complete%20 Streets%20Evaluation%20Methodology.pdf
Figure 24 was developed by NCDOT to provide facility selection guidance to planners and designers to use based on the amount of traffic along and the configuration of a street.
Figure 23. Complete Streets Project Evaluation Methodology Process (Source: NCDOT Complete Streets Evaluation Methodology).
166 /// GAP Plan /
Figure 24. Facility Selection Matrix (Source: NCDOT)
Facility Selection Legend and Notes
AADT and Roadway Configuration Operating Speed
Operating speed of 35 mph or less <6,000 AADT (2 or 3 Lanes) P: Wide Sidewalk (2) O: Sidewalk (2)
Pedestrian and Bicycle Demand
High
B: Buffered Bicycle Lane O: Bicycle Lane, Shared Lane
Any cross section with designs supporting speeds above 35 mph ≥6,000 AADT (2 or 3 Lanes)
4 Lane Divided
>4 Lanes
P: Wide Sidewalk (2) O: Sidewalk (2) B: SBL/SUP O: Buffered Bicycle Lane, Bicycle Lane
P: Sidewalk (1-2)
Medium
Low
B: Buffered Bicycle Lane O: Bicycle Lane, Shared Lane
B: SBL/SUP O: Buffered Bicycle Lane, Bicycle Lane
B - Denotes priority bicycle facility or space to accommodate bicyclists. The priority bicycle selection must be analyzed first before consideration of additional facility type options. O - Denotes alternative facility options for consideration in order of recommended evaluation after the priority facility. Options that provide the greatest separation from motor vehicles must be evaluated before other options. Terms: SBL = Separated Bicycle Lane, SUP = Shared-Use Path, “Shared Lane” may consist of Shared Lane Markings, additional markings, and traffic control devices for bicycle awareness, “Sidewalk+” indicates that presence of sidewalk and expanded buffer/furnishing strips, “Paved Shoulder” may accommodate bicyclists with widths that are to be determined, and “Shared Roadways” may include signage and shoulders per 3R guidance. (#) - Indicates number of sidewalks along a roadway. * - Sidewalk placement dependent on distribution of development along the roadway. For balanced development, consider sidewalks on both sides. Where land development is not consistent along both sides of the roadway and there is potential for pedestrian and /or bicycle crossing, consider including sidewalks on both sides of the roadway. Dual Priority Facility Types: When two priority facility types are shown for a mode, such as separated bicycle lanes and shared-use path (SBL/SUP), the Project Lead and Manager should review local plans, the roadway and bicycle and pedestrian network, and on-site conditions to select the more appropriate facility. Demand for Both Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities: In situations where demand is present of anticipated for both pedestrian and bicyclists, follow the facility selection table to accommodate both user types.
P: Sidewalk (1) O: Paved Shoulder (width TBD), No Facility/Shared Roadway B: Paved Shoulder (width TBD) O: Shared Roadway/ No Facility
Intermittent / None
P: Sidewalk + Expanded Buffer (1-2)* O: Sidewalk (1-2)*
P - Denotes priority pedestrian facility. The priority pedestrian facility must be analyzed first before consideration of additional facility type options.
P: Sidewalk (1) O: Paved Shoulder (width TBD)
P: Sidewalk (1) O: Paved Shoulder (width TBD)
B: Paved Shoulder (width TBD) O: Shared Roadway/ No Facility
B: SUP O: Paved Shoulder (width TBD), Shared Roadway/No Facility
B: Shared Roadway / No Facility
Cross Sections: Select the roadway configuration column with the same or higher number of lanes and median presence. Atypical cross sections (i.e. four-lane undivided, imbalanced lane configurations) are not shown above. Speed: Vehicle operating speed is an overall consideration for selecting facility types for pedestrians and bicyclists. High vehicle speeds increase the likelihood of a fatal or severe injury in the event of a pedestrian crash. If the operating speed is expected to be above 35 mph, then separated pedestrian and bicycle facilities are a priority of reducing the risk of severe injury and fatal bicycle an pedestrian crashes. The roadway project should include a network that supports the needs of the design user (considering the most likely type of bicyclist and abilities of the pedestrian population). The roadway should also include design features and measures to help achieve the desired operating speed, based on the surrounding context. If the operation speed exceeds the listed AADT and cross section, select the higher AADT lane configuration. Shoulders: Paved shoulders are neither a pedestrian nor bicycle facility, and the Project Lead and Manager should consult with the LGA and review for safety needs when considering this option. Paved shoulders are typical improvements on NCDOT projects, and Project Leads and Managers should consult the NCDOT Roadway Design Manual for standard widths.
Another tool developed with NCDOT’s PEM is the interactive user demand estimation tool. The image on the left shows the Balance Demand Scenario Scores for the Asheville area.
TO VIEW THE TOOL: Please visit: https://www.arcgis. com/apps/webappviewer/index. html?id=4d99643ea1354c0e9e8ad27243983bc4
/
GAP Plan
/// 167
ROA DWAY C RO S S I NG TREATM ENT S E L EC T IO N To create a truly accessible community for all transportation modes, facilities must be designed to maximize comfort, convenience and safety – not only along corridors but at locations where people walking interact with streets crossings, trails and driveways (access points). As discussed in the introduction of this Plan, people walking are disproportionally impacted by traffic crashes2. Potential exposure to people walking is introduced at intersections and crossings where these movements cross the path of motor vehicles. This is evident across the state of North Carolina where over the last 10 years, crossing related crashes accounted for 41% of on-roadway crashes involving people walking.3
More information can be found here: https://connect. ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Teppl/TEPPL%20 All%20Documents%20Library/Pedestrian_Crossing_ Guidance.pdf FHWA’s Proven Safety Countermeasures Initiative (PSCi) The USDOT Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has a Proven Safety Countermeasures Initiative (PSCi), which is the culmination of almost 15 years of safety work and now includes a comprehensive tool that can be used by transportation practitioners. This online tool can be used to address a variety of areas that impact pedestrian crossing safety including: • Speed management and speed limit setting guidance. • Crosswalk visibility enhancements and lighting
At the state and national level, many advances have been made in developing guidance and standards for pedestrian safety. The following resources represent best practices and should be carefully followed in the planning and design of pedestrian facilities for the Close the GAP pedestrian corridors.
• Leading pedestrian intervals
Guides for Improvement Pedestrian Safety at Uncontrolled Crossing Locations
• Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (PHBs)
North Carolina Pedestrian Crossing Guidelines (2018) The North Carolina Pedestrian Crossing Guidelines (2018) provides guidance on when to consider marking crosswalks at uncontrolled approaches for pedestrians, when to install pedestrian signal heads at existing signalized intersections and when to providing supplemental treatments at a crossing location. The report includes a crosswalk assessment flowchart and is provided in a poster format that fully describes most aspects of the evaluation and decision-making process. The guidelines principally consist of four parts: Step 1) Document Existing Characteristics / Signalized Crossing Assessment Step 2) Unsignalized Crossing or Midblock Crossing Assessment Step 3) Additional / Alternative Treatments Assessment Step 4) Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB) Assessment
168 /// GAP Plan /
• Road diets • Medians and pedestrian refuge islands • Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs)
More information can be found here: https://safety. fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/ FHWA Toolbox of Pedestrian Countermeasures and Their Potential Effectiveness FHWA also issued a brief 8-page document in September 2018 that provides an extensive list of proven pedestrian countermeasures and reports on the anticipated “crash reduction that might be expected if a specific countermeasure or group of countermeasures is implemented with respect to pedestrian crashes”. More information can be found here: https://safety. fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/tools_solve/fhwasa18041/ fhwasa18041.pdf
FHWA’s Safe Transportation for Every Pedestrian (STEP) Guide Nationally, locations where there is no traffic control (i.e., no traffic signal or stop sign to stop traffic) correspond to higher crash rates. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) released the “Guide for Improving Pedestrian Safety at Uncontrolled Crossing Locations” that provides crossing guidance for uncontrolled crossings to help local and state agencies “address significant national safety problems and improve quality of life for pedestrians of all ages and abilities”.4
Figure 25. Steps Involved for Selecting Counter-measures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations (Sources: STEP Guide)
The FHWA guide includes a process for evaluating crossings and determining appropriate countermeasures for specific crossing conditions based on engineering which includes data collection, site condition analysis and crash history review. These countermeasures range in cost and applicability based on roadway type and conditions. The guide process includes the analysis and countermeasure selection steps, illustrated in Figure 25. The STEP Guide includes a process for evaluating crossings and determining appropriate countermeasures for specific crossing conditions based on engineering which includes data collection, site condition analysis and crash history review. These countermeasures range in cost and applicability based on roadway type and conditions. Within the STEP Guide, seven lower-cost countermeasures (called “The Spectacular Seven”) are recommended to address significant national safety issues. These seven countermeasures are depicted in renderings and descriptions in Table 17, along with the corresponding reduction in crashes involving a person walking that is associated with each treatment.
/
GAP Plan
/// 169
Table 17. Seven Key Solutions to Improve Pedestrian Safety at Intersections (Source: STEP Guide). COUNTERMEASURE NAME
Crosswalk Visibility Enhancements
BRIEF DESCRIPTION
Key Elements: o High-visibility crosswalks o Pedestrian crossing warning sign (MUTCD W11-2) o Parking restrictions o Lighting o Other treatments may be considered (e.g., curb extension)
REDUCTION IN CRASHES INVOLVING A PERSON WALKING
23-48%
COUNTERMEASURE NAME
Raised Crosswalks
BRIEF DESCRIPTION
Function as an extension of the sidewalk and allow a person walking to cross the street at a constant grade.
REDUCTION IN CRASHES INVOLVING A PERSON WALKING
45%
COUNTERMEASURE NAME
Pedestrian Refuge Islands
BRIEF DESCRIPTION
Typically constructed in the middle of a 2-way street to provide a place for people on foot to wait for people driving to stop or yield.
REDUCTION IN CRASHES INVOLVING A PERSON WALKING
32%
COUNTERMEASURE NAME
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (PHB)
BRIEF DESCRIPTION
Unlike a traffic signal, the PHB rests in dark until a person walking activates it at which time the beacon displays a sequence of flashing and solid lights that control vehicular traffic while the pedestrian signal heads indicate when the pedestrian can walk.
REDUCTION IN CRASHES INVOLVING A PERSON WALKING
55%
170 /// GAP Plan /
COUNTERMEASURE NAME
Road Diet
BRIEF DESCRIPTION
A reconfiguration of the roadway that is appropriate for an undivided road with wide travel lanes or multiple lanes that can be narrowed or repurposed to improve crossing safety for people walking.
REDUCTION IN CRASHES INVOLVING A PERSON WALKING
19-47%
COUNTERMEASURE NAME
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB)
BRIEF DESCRIPTION
A pedestrian actuated conspicuity enhancement used in combination with a pedestrian crossing warning sign to improve safety at uncontrolled, marked crosswalks.
REDUCTION IN CRASHES INVOLVING A PERSON WALKING
47%
COUNTERMEASURE NAME
Leading Pedestrian Interval
BRIEF DESCRIPTION
Typically, a 3-7 second head start before vehicles are given a green signal.
REDUCTION IN CRASHES INVOLVING A PERSON WALKING
59%
To assist practitioners, the FHWA guide offers a matrix tool to determine appropriate crossing treatments that should be considered at an uncontrolled crossing based on posted speeds, annual average daily traffic (AADT) and the number of lanes a person walking must cross with or without a median or refuge island. These treatments should be based on an engineering judgement. In addition, it is important to note that the matrix provides a toolbox for treatments rather than mandated or required treatments. For midblock and uncontrolled crosswalks, the STEP Guide advises the following best practices and planning considerations:
• Consider how far the person walking needs to travel in distance and time (shorter distance and time is most successful) • Follow currently used travel routes • Connect key destinations • Maximize low-risk crossing locations • Avoid busy intersections and higher conflict areas if feasible In addition to the STEP Guide, there are also several design related guides and standards that address
/
GAP Plan
/// 171
crossing design for pedestrian facilities at traffic signals, unsignalized intersections and mid-block (non-intersection) locations. One such resource is the NCDOT Pedestrian Crossing Guidelines (2018). These resources are detailed in the Implementation Plan section of this document.
P RO JEC T E L E ME NT S F O R P EO P L E WA L K I NG The work of pedestrian system planning also includes the finer details such as traffic calming, access to transit and ADA accessibility. This section focuses on the finer, yet necessary, details that ensure that the pedestrian network is functional for all.
Traffic Calming As traffic congestion and travel speeds increase on a street, there can be negative impacts to people walking. Traffic calming is a tool to manage the negative impacts of traffic on the street through physical design and other measures. In addition, as reviewed, speed is a major predictor of injury severity, thus calming traffic will help reduce severe and fatal crashes involving people walking. The Federal Highways Administration (FHWA) and Institute of Transportation Engineers have developed the Traffic Calming ePrimer5 in which they provide the following broad categories of traffic calming: • Horizontal deflection requires a person driving a car to navigate around a feature, including: • Curb extensions • Median crossing islands • Lateral shift/chicane (modification to roadway design to eliminate straight, unimpeded section of roadway) • Vertical deflection requires a person driving a car to travel over a feature, such as: • Speed humps/bumps • Raised crosswalks • Raised intersections • Roundabouts utilize both horizontal and vertical deflection • Street width reduction by using tools such as a road diet or lane narrowing • Routing restrictions, closures and turn restrictions such as: • Diverters
172 /// GAP Plan /
WHAT IS TRAFFIC CALMING? The primary purpose of traffic calming is to support the livability and vitality of residential and commercial areas through improvements in non-motorist safety, mobility, and comfort. These objectives are typically achieved by reducing vehicle speeds or volumes on a single street or a street network. Traffic calming measures consist of horizontal, vertical, lane narrowing, roadside, and other features that use self-enforcing physical or psychoperception means to produce desired effects. (Source: FHWA Traffic Calming ePrimer)
• Half or full closures • Median barrier • Turn restriction Traffic calming measures can be applied to projects in this Plan as ways to improve the walkability and safety on Asheville’s streets.
Decorative Crosswalks Increasingly, municipalities are interested in making their downtowns both aesthetically pleasing and friendly for people walking, and one commonly sought-after way to do this is through streetscape elements like colored or decorative crosswalks. Various decorative crosswalk options are available that can be customized to increase crosswalk visibility while not distracting people driving from the road. FHWA issued a memorandum on August 15, 20136 related to decorative crosswalk patterns. Based on the FHWA memorandum, it is possible to develop an aesthetic crosswalk pattern if it meets the following criteria: • No retro-reflective, traffic control or distracting elements within the vehicular traveled way
• Acceptable pattern examples are repetitive such as brick, lattice, cobbles or paving stones
• Enhanced crossings and signal timings for people walking near transit stops;
• Acceptable colors are neutral such as red, rust, brown etc.
• Bus shelters, benches and trash receptacles; and
Any such treatment placed on an NCDOT-maintained roadway needs to be closely coordinated with the Division 13 office to ensure it meets both the FHWA memorandum as well as NCDOT standards.
• Accessible bus stop landings.
Access to Transit Understanding transit in relation to a pedestrian network is important as both modal opportunities offer enhancements to each other and are most effective when seen as a unit. Every person taking transit is also a person walking, and for transit systems to be effective, the “first and last mile” of a person’s transit trip is often taken by foot. The phrase “first and last mile” is frequently used when understanding transportation systems and is not intended to be literal but rather a reference to the first and last leg of a transit trip that is taken on foot. For both systems to work together well, transit and pedestrian networks need to be safe, efficient and connected. This means solutions such as sidewalks connecting to bus stops and bus stops with shelters. The following high-level items are recommended to ensure that transit and pedestrian systems are better integrated: • Include high quality (direct and safe) access to bus stops during project development;
Accessibility for All The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 is a civil rights law that prohibits discrimination based on someone’s disability. Title II of the Act requires cities and towns to have a plan to make accommodations for everyone. Sidewalks, street crossings, and other elements in the public right-of-way can pose challenges to accessibility and many people with disabilities rely on the multimodal network as their primary, or only, way to get from place to place. Creating an equitable transportation system requires that people with disabilities can move about without barriers. To address these challenges, the US Access Board has developed a set of design standards for transportation: the “Proposed Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities in the Public Right-of-Way”, or PROWAG. The PROWAG addresses people’s access to sidewalks and streets, including crosswalks, curb ramps, street furnishings, pedestrian signals, parking, and other components of public rights-ofway. The goal of the access board in developing these guidelines “is to ensure that access for persons with disabilities is provided wherever a pedestrian way
43
44
Image 43 / Recently Upgraded Transit Stop on Tunnel Road That Needs Additional Crossing Treatments. Image 44 / Unimproved Bus Stop on Tunnel Road Which is One of the Most Heavily Used Transit Corridors in the City.
/
GAP Plan
/// 173
is newly built or altered, and that the same degree of convenience, connection, and safety afforded the public generally is available to pedestrians with disabilities”. Once these guidelines are adopted by the Department of Justice, they will become enforceable standards under Title II of the ADA. Although these guidelines are currently in development, many jurisdictions have adopted them as their local standard. These standards represent industry best practices and should be followed for all future transportation infrastructure projects in Asheville. See the Chapter 6 for more details on the ADA Transition Plan for the Public Right-of-Way.
45
Image 45 / These Guidelines Propose Accessibility Guidance for the Design, Construction and Alteration of Pedestrian Facilities in the Public Right-of-Way
174 /// GAP Plan /
Chapter 7 Endnotes 1 8 80 Cities. (2020). https://www.880cities.org/ 2 The League of American Bicyclists. (2018). Bicycling and Walking in the United States: 2018 Benchmarking Report. https://bikeleague.org/ benchmarking-report. 3 NCDOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Crash Database: 2007-2018 4 EDC-5: Safe Transportation for Every Pedestrian. (2020, May 26). Accessed April 2021 https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/everydaycounts/edc_5/ step2.cfm 5 FHWA. (2017). Traffic Calming ePrimer. https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/traffic_calm.cfm 6 MUTCD Official Ruling 3(09)-24(I) – Application of Colored Pavement
/
GAP Plan
/// 175
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
8
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT & NEXT STEPS
“
I prefer walks around neighborhoods to admire architecture and landscapes.” - South Asheville Resident
178 /// GAP Plan /
8
PROJECT D E V E LO P M E N T & NEXT STEPS The Greenway, ADA Transition and Pedestrian Plans identify the network and corridor ideas for the City to pursue. That is because Close the GAP is the guiding plan phase of this process. The following chapter describes the steps that the City will pursue to develop these projects further.
projects vary greatly in complexity and, therefore, vary greatly in the time it takes for implementation. Given this variation in complexity, the priority rankings in this Close the GAP Plan do not reflect the order that projects will be constructed. The rankings reflect the recommended order that funding should be secured to initiate project scoping and preliminary engineering studies to get projects moving toward implementation. One of the key goals of Close the GAP is to improve the consistency in how projects are prioritized for funding in order to move key projects into the project development pipeline.
B EYO N D PR E L I MI NA RY P L A N N IN G The Close the GAP effort comprises what is often referred to as preliminary project planning for the pedestrian projects. It is important to understand that this Close the GAP plan is the first in many steps that are required to deliver a constructed pedestrian facility. From there, a project identified in this Plan will move into the next stages of project development. The projects included in the Greenway, ADA and Pedestrian Plans include some that are new and some that are in a different stage of project development.
Image 46 / Staff at Work on Sidewalk Upgrades in Asheville.
46
The Recommended Project Implementation Process on the following page describes the key steps to take a corridor project from this plan to construction. Although typical time frames are listed for each step,
/ GAP Plan /// 179
Quick Sheets #9:
Recommended Project Implementation Process 1
Project Development (Duration varies)
Project development doesn’t have a time frame, as this is where the concept becomes a project. • Identify project goals • Corridor needs assessment • Feasibility assessment (or feasibility study for more complex projects) • Create a public communications and engagement plan • Identify funding, project delivery approach and permitting needs • Determine stakeholders and a design team • Define scope, goals, budget and schedule • High-level cost estimates and key cost factors (risks)
2
Preliminary Engineering Investigations* (6 to 12 months)
Preliminary engineering will involve proceeding through 30% design prior to finalizing the project scope and budget. • • • • • • •
Collect data and analyze alternatives Develop preliminary improvement concepts Begin public communication / engagement Develop bike and pedestrian facility options Identify environmental / stormwater approach Refine scope, goals, budget and schedule Completion of preliminary engineering is the ideal stage for a capital budget or other funding request.
*The level of detail for preliminary engineering investigations may vary based on project complexity. Simple projects can often move straight into Step 3. More complex projects require a feasibility study which may be initiated early in Step 1, prior to project funding.
3
Final Design (12 to 24 months)
Final design generally has three additional review points at 60%, 90% and 100% design. • • • • • •
Determine type, size and location of bridges or culverts (if needed), usually at 30% Continue public communication / engagement Acquire right-or-way as needed Obtain permits Develop bid package Refine scope, budget and schedule at each review point
4
Construction (12 to 36 months)
Construction is when the road work occurs. • Conduct management / oversight • Maintain quality assurance / quality control • Provide periodic construction status updates to public
FI N E T U NI NG T H E PRO C E SS During the Close the GAP process, several areas were identified in the project development process that may help improve project implementation, if consistently applied. • A goal setting and needs assessment process that includes early public input and an early data collection and constructability review. • Consistency in project planning to make sure that projects are vetted with the public and engineering investigations prior to setting budgets and scope limits. • Flexibility to adjust project scope and budgets as additional engineering is completed and unforeseen project constraints arise. • Develop consistent project pipeline of vetted projects to prepare for future funding. To address these areas for improvement, the team developed the Recommended Project Implementation Process and a Pre-Design Project Development Checklist. This Pre-Design Project Development Checklist should be a key element in the implementation of the City’s Greenway, ADA Transition and Pedestrian Plans as well as all other transportation projects. A few key highlights of these recommendations are as follows: • The Recommended Project Implementation Process on the previous page includes additional guidance on public engagement and the need for integration at all stages of project development, and importantly, before project scope and budget are finalized.
Project Implementation Process. At this point, if the project is recommended to proceed, it would become a standalone project with a line item in the following years’ fiscal budget request. • In order to ensure completion of the ADA Transition Plan, the Pre-Design Project Development Checklist includes an ADA compliance review that, ideally, would be completed consistently with each City transportation project. This will help ensure that accessibility is integrated early in project scoping and will help maximize outcomes for the Plan’s standalone projects, which are expensive and challenging to fund. As such, integration with projects early will help ensure that each project maximizes removal of ADA obstacles, including utility conflicts and right-of-way limitations. This will also help to prevent new projects going to construction that have non-compliant ADA elements from the start. A phased approach may be needed to complete all upgrades; however, this Pre-Design Project Checklist should be a key element in the implementation of the City’s Greenway, ADA Transition and Pedestrian Plans as well as other transportation projects. • Refinements to project scope, goals, budget, and schedule are included at each project development stage as additional engineering reveals project unknowns. This is often complemented by a project Figure 26. Standard Contingency Methodology Order of Magnitude Planning Cost Estimate
40%
Conceptual Level Cost Estimate
• Inclusion of Feasibility Assessments/Studies and Corridor Studies for more complex projects. • The Pre-Design Project Development Checklist (as shown on the following page) can be used for consistent pre-design project vetting to minimize significant scope changes later in the design process that can create public frustration and can limit project outcomes. • Solidify the project scope and the final design and construction budget after preliminary engineering has reached the appropriate level of completion, generally the 30% of final design milestone. The 30% milestone is Step 2: Preliminary Engineering in the Recommended
Based on best available information and historical linear foot (or square foot) costs
35%
Based on additional investigations, conceptual plans with alignments, type of structures, topographic maps etc
Preliminary Eng. Cost (30% Design)
20%
• After preliminary engineering 30% level plans • Based on actual field survey with most features identified including right-of-way • Based on actual quantities and most closely related unit prices
100% Design Cost
10%
• Based on 100% final plans and plats • After design and permitting is complete • Post utility coordination, property acquitisions and detour planning • Based on final quantities
/
GAP Plan
/// 181
Quick Sheets #10:
Pre-Design Project Development Checklist Duration and complexity of this evaluation varies e.g. Simple sidewalk projects may require minimal research as compared to a corridor study that involves roadway and intersection modifications.
1 Identify Project Goals 2 Corridor Needs Assessment
This evaluation should include items such as: • • • • •
Review of missing sections of sidewalk ADA compliance review Existing traffic data/conditions Pedestrian patterns and crossing needs Development patterns (existing and future)
• Bicycle needs, overlapping neighborhood greenway routes • Overlapping infrastructure needs such as drainage for storm water or repaving • Community feedback and community context (appropriateness of facilities based on community conditions)
Community Feedback Note: This evaluation may require early public surveys or engagement in order to identify local needs. Legacy neighborhoods may require stabilization plans prior to project implementation. As such, extensive neighborhood communication should begin during Step 2: Corridor Needs Assessment. This evaluation may result in revised projects, as well as delays to address stabilization efforts.
3 Feasibility Assessment (or Feasibility Study* for More Complex Projects)
This effort is a high level investigation of physical and environmental constraints that may impact the ability and/or cost to construct a new pedestrian facility or upgrade existing facilities. It is also helpful for identifying key project risks that may need additional investigation before the scope and cost can be defined. This evaluation should include items such as: • Environmental features (e.g. wetlands, threatened and endangered species, waterways) • Physical constraints (e.g. steep slopes, buildings and private property impacts) • Right-of-way availability (property ownership or the ability to acquire property for facilities) • Utilities and railroad lines *More complex projects may require a detailed feasibility study with more robust data collection in order to clearly define the project scope and budget requirements.
4 High-Level Cost Estimates and Key Cost Factors
Planning level costs estimates serve as a placeholder, or preliminary cost estimate for funding agencies. Since these costs are completed before engineering, some costs will be unknown and should be flagged as key cost variations for further investigation. Examples include possible hazardous waste sites, soil testing and flood studies.
5 Create a Public Communications and Engagement Plan
Legacy neighborhoods may require stabilization plans prior to project implementation. As such, this neighborhood communication should begin during Step 2: Corridor Needs Assessment. This evaluation may result in revised projects, as well as delays to address stabilization efforts.
6 Identify Funding and Determine Project Delivery Approach and Permitting Needs Examples of funding sources include federal, state, MPO, local, and private partnerships. See Appendix 11 for a detailed funding guide.
7 Determine Stakeholders and Design Team & Advance to Preliminary Engineering
Quick Sheets #11:
FAQ’s on Project Development & Next Steps
What to Expect How long will it take? Each project varies in complexity and the order of priority should not be interpreted as order of construction. It is important to acknowledge that the timeline for planning, designing and constructing new sidewalks can vary greatly. A simple short sidewalk section on City roads that does not require purchasing private land could potentially be designed and built in 6 months if there are no complicating factors such as retaining walls, bridges or need for curbing and drainage infrastructure. However, a corridor project such as Swannanoa River Road could be 10 years in the future. This project must follow NCDOT and Federal funding requirements and permitting and includes the purchase of substantial land (right-of-way), design of bridges and evaluation of environmental and flood impacts.
What if our community has been traditionally under-served and we are concerned about improvements impacting our housing affordability? During the Close the GAP equity evaluation and public engagement outreach, several communities expressed this concern. As such, all projects in those communities have been listed as tentative. A detailed community planning effort is recommended to refine the needs and desires of the community before the projects listed move into funding and development.
Will I have a chance to comment and be involved in the projects? The opportunity for public involvement will continue as projects move through this process. Similar to the timeline for construction discussion above, the higher the level of complexity of a project and the greater the impacts, the more opportunity there should be in the process for public input. Public comment begins in this planning and funding stage of projects and continues each time a project moves through Council’s agenda. In addition, the project design process includes input throughout, in order to ensure that the design meets the needs of the community.
/
GAP Plan
/// 183
cost estimating methodology that includes a contingency that is highest at early planning stages and decreases as design is finalized and the number of unknowns decreases. An example of this best practice is shown in Figure 26.
Project Development When NCDOT or Federal Funds are Involved Once this plan is complete, projects will be selected to move forward into the NCDOT prioritization process, known as SPOT. Projects selected to be funded will then move into the NCDOT project development process for design, approvals and clearances, right-of-way acquisition and construction.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) The NEPA was one of the first laws (42 U.S.C. §4321 et seq. 1969) written that established a broad national framework for protecting our environment. NEPA’s basic policy is to assure that all branches of government give proper consideration to the environment prior to undertaking any major federal action that significantly affects the environment.
When projects are funded with State and Federal transportation dollars, project managers must follow a specific State and Federal project development process. This process includes environmental permitting to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The “pre-design” process for State and Federally funded projects has specific steps and processes as show in Figures 27 and 28.
Figure 27. How to Get Roads Built (Source: https://www.ncdot.gov/initiatives-policies/Transportation/how-road-gets-built/ Pages/default.aspx)
184 /// GAP Plan /
Figure 28. NCDOT Transportation Planning Process
COMP PLAN
MTP1
SPOT2
TIP3
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
Identify local vision and needs
Identify region’s long range project plan
Identify region’s top projects
Identify the region’s 10-year funding plan
Develop (construct) Projects
20 - 30 year planning horizon
20 year planning horizon, updated every 5 years
Criteria updated periodically
A 10 year plan that is updated every 2 years
Timing depends on size and scope of project
/
GAP Plan
/// 185
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
9
DESIGN & POLICY
“
Need more sidewalks!! Sidewalks connect communities and promotes health” - East Asheville Resident
9
DESIGN & POLICY The purpose of this chapter is to provide design standards, policy review findings and recommendations that are needed to update implementation and maintenance of Greenways, ADA and Pedestrian facilities so the City may reflect evolving national standards and best practices.
I N TRO D U C T IO N When we think about the ingredients that make up a livable community, a safe and convenient place for people to walk and bike or access the bus for daily activities is at the top of the list. Planners, engineers and project designers rely on standards and policy guidance during implementation and maintenance of pedestrian and bicycle facilities to ensure safety, consistency and predictability. Historically, the resources to design these multimodal facilities have been limited. Over the last 15 years, design guidance has improved, equipping practitioners with the resources to develop ideas and try out innovations seen in other communities and internationally. These advancements in design and policy practice are essential to integrate into local codes, policies and practices, enabling communities to achieve a multimodal transportation network that is more inclusive to people of all ages and abilities and that can be well-customized to the local context.
D ESIG N STANDARD S & POL ICY RE VI E W TASKS As part of the Close the GAP process, the consultant team was tasked with the following policy and standard review in order to develop recommendations to improve implementation and maintenance of Greenways, ADA and Pedestrian facilities for the City. 1. Review of the City of Asheville’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) sections related to Greenway, ADA and Pedestrian facilities. 2. Review of the City of Asheville’s Standards Specifications and Details Manual (ASSDM) sections related to Greenway, ADA and Pedestrian facilities. 3. Conduct a series of Targeted Focus Groups with NCDOT and various City departments that are responsible for overseeing implementation and maintenance of Greenway, ADA and Pedestrian projects in the City of Asheville. These meetings focused on policies and procedural challenges to delivering fully ADA compliant pedestrian facilities in the public rights-of-way. These tasks resulted in a detailed set of policy and design standard recommendations and best practice references that will be useful references for updating City policies and standards. The following sections summarize the findings and key recommendations for each Design Standard and Policy Review task listed above. The full detailed review tables are include in Appendix 12.
/ GAP Plan /// 189
Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Findings and Recommendations The City of Asheville’s UDO is a document that contains regulations that apply to different types of land uses, development, and other regulations. For example, the UDO includes chapters such as Development, Historic Preservation, and Nuisances. In general, the UDO communicates the expectations of the City as it relates to development projects and activities. For example, the UDO requires new sidewalk when someone develops a new multi-family residential development with 10 or more units. The planning team conducted an in-depth review of Asheville’s UDO to identify standards that promote, could be changed to improve, or hinder walkability. The review noted recommended changes to and identified gaps in UDO language. The detailed UDO review and recommendations results are included in Appendix 12.A. Key UDO recommendations that have the greatest impact on pedestrian mobility in the City have been included in a set of comprehensive Action Items that are listed in Chapter 10.
Asheville Standards Specifications and Details Manual (ASSDM) Findings and Recommendations Where the UDO communicates when a sidewalk is to be installed (new multi-family units with 10 or more units), the ASSDM outlines how to construct the sidewalk. For example, the ASSDM requires new sidewalks on local streets to include three elements: a 1.5-foot setback from the right-of-way, a 5-foot sidewalk, and a 5-foot utility strip/setback from street or curb edge. These policy and design standards are used to determine such factors as: • Facility selection: shared or separated facilities (sidewalk, greenway, bike lanes etc.) • Facility width • Separation (or buffer) from traffic or features such as streams and steep slopes • Need for facilities on one or both sides of the street • Pedestrian crossing spacing and treatments • Accessibility standards - ADA compliance for ramps, sidewalks, crossings, greenways
Image 47 / A Sample Image and Table from Asheville’s Standards and Design Manual.
47
190 /// GAP Plan /
• Accessibility standards for transit stops and onstreet parking
• Lighting requirements and standards
TARGETED FOCUS GROUP SESSION STRUCTURE
• Temporary traffic control (work zone accommodations for bicycle and pedestrians)
Questions for Each Category
• Trail crossing design (e.g., sight distance, markings and signage)
Existing: How are things done now? Existing Issues / Challenges / Shortfalls.
• Transit stop amenities
• Pedestrian signal standards (including audible pedestrian signal (APS) needs) The detailed ASSDM review and recommendations results are included in Appendix 12.B. Key ASSDM recommendations that have the greatest impact on pedestrian mobility in the City have been included in a set of comprehensive Action Items that are listed in Chapter 10.
Targeted Focus Group Meeting Findings and Recommendations The following Targeted Focus Group meetings were held with various City departments that are responsible for overseeing implementation and maintenance of Greenway, ADA and Pedestrian projects in the City of Asheville. The following 4 focus group meetings were held: 1. Transportation Department 2. Public Works and Streets Departments 3. Planning and Development Services Departments 4. Capital Projects During the Targeted Focus Group meetings, the planning team covered a series of questions and discussion topics, which are shown to the right. The findings and recommendations are summarized in Table 18.
Special Focus Areas The Close the GAP team was tasked with delving into several policy topics in greater detail: best practices for temporary traffic control, and a review of alternative surfaces for sidewalks (vs. standard concrete). Temporary traffic control and sidewalk maintenance are addressed in Appendices as follows:
Future Goal: If you could change how things are done, what would you change? How should it be done, if differently than today? Target for Future Gap Identification: Needed Resources + Desired Methods/Ideas to Bridge the Gap
CATEGORIES Resources & Planning: Funding: Planning, feasibility studies, cost estimating procedures, design and construction, maintenance, emerging needs and requests Staff: Training (new standards), capacity (e.g. review specificity requires staffing and coordination), inspection forms, internal design Project Implementation (Design Construction): Private development, public works, major projects (local funding - Bond, etc.), major projects (non-City funded, e.g. STBG), NCDOT project coordination Policy Specific: UDO related, ASSDM related, organizations working in the public right-of-way (e.g., utilities), inspection forms, right-of-way and easement acquisition, legal options, complaints and requests, public meetings (accommodations / locations)
Accompanying Documents: Alternatives to Sidewalks Guidebook Accompanying Documents: Pedestrian Accommodations in Work Zones Design Guidance and Checklist
/
GAP Plan
/// 191
Table 19. Focus Group Meeting Findings and Recommendations Targeted Focus Groups: Identified Needs by Category
Recommendation
Investment Considerations
Project Selection & Prioritization Needs Clear equity definition and application guidance.
Clarify policy on transportation equity and process for prioritization.
Policy/Program Development
Funding flexibility for emergency projects and partner matching (grants).
Consider funding set aside for emergency and grant/ partnership opportunities.
Funding Investment
Public facing database with City responses to community sidewalk and ADA related requests (Asheville App and other community requests).
Update Asheville App (or similar) where records, City responses, and actions taken are visible to the public.
Policy/Program Development
Need for more funding to support project implementation
See Chapters 5, 6, 7 and 8 for detailed recommendations.
Funding Investment
Project Scoping and ROW Needs Project scope and final budget set with insufficient preliminary engineering and there is a need for contingency or flexibility in scope to address unknown budget issues.
See recommended project implementation process in Chapter 8.
Capital Project Planning Policy
Issues with public expectation on projects that lead to scope creep or public frustration.
See recommended project implementation process in Chapter 8. Consider standard website format for project decision history and graphical documentation of design decisions for public consumption.
Capital Project Planning Policy
Challenges with right-of-way acquisition that delay sidewalk and greenway projects, and limit ADA compliance. For example, more ADA ramps will be technically infeasible or result in undesireable corner ramps if right-of-way is not secured earlier in the process.
See recommended project implementation process in Chapter 8.
Capital Project Planning Policy
Limited resurfacing budgets and scoping result in missed opportunities include funding for ADA work, complete streets components such as parking spaces, bike lanes.
In order to better address ADA compliance during resurfacing (to include full ADA upgrades that may require right-of-way), look to plan ahead to integrate and coordinate overlapping ADA transition plan and Capital Projects along planned resurfacing routes.
Capital Project Planning Policy and Funding Investment
Design Standards, UDO and Policy Update City ADA ramp details and relevant design standards to reflect Proposed Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG). See detailed recommendations included in the review of Asheville’s Standard Specifications and Details Manual (ASSDM) in Appendix 12.B. Need updated ADA design standards and review requirements, including driveways.
Modify development and transportation design and review process to require an ADA checklist and approval by designated ADA specialist. Designs should include detailed elevations with ADA measurements. Develop and require technical infeasibility forms (TIFs) for instances where full ADA compliance is not feasible within the scope of work. These forms should be kept on file or uploaded into a GIS database.
192 /// GAP Plan /
Policy/Program Development
Table 18. Focus Group Meeting Findings and Recommendations (Continued) Targeted Focus Groups: Identified Needs by Category
Investment Considerations
Recommendation
Designing for a 2% cross slope often results in non-compliant ramps because designing for the maximum does not allow for construction tolerances (variations).
Modify design standards to less than maximum, for example, 1.5% cross slope vs max 2% to allow for construction tolerances (variations).
Policy/Program Development
Need improved crossing guidance for use of raised crosswalks, lighting, RRFB's, signal features, APS/LPI, etc.
See Chapter 7 for more on crossing recommendations.
Policy/Program Development
The ASSDM contains sidewalk standards based on context, some of which have both a recommended and minimum width standard. Consider adding a recommended and minimum width for all types of sidewalk contexts based in the tiers described in Chapter 4 and other land uses, City plans, etc.
Policy/Program Development
Need a clear sidewalk policy for waivers.
When a sidewalk that is less than the maximum width is requested, require design documentation on constraints prior to accepting minimum widths. Need for ADA on-street parking standards.
Update parking space design and requirements in the ASSDM to reflect PROWAG details.
Policy/Program Development
Updates needed on details for transit stop accessibility.
Update standard ADA details for bus stops. See ASSDM recommendations table.
Policy/Program Development
Update temporary street closure (construction and events) process (see Appendix for more details).
Frequent issues with inadequate access through work zone and temporary sidewalk closures.
Require a detour design and approval submission for any sidewalk or ramp closure and review to ensure detour is in compliance with the MUTCD requirements and proposed PROWAG standards. • consider certification process for selected contractors.
Policy/Program Development
• provide contractor resources on City website with • typical applications and best practices. • consider implementing/revising enforcement / violation fee structure
Need for lighting requirements / standards for sidewalks, crossings and greenways.
Develop a sustainable street light policy and program to address lighting best practices in locations of high pedestrian usage and at pedestrian crossing locations. See example programs in the UDO (Appendix 12.A) and ASSDM (Appendix 12.B) recommendations tables.
Policy/Program Development
Enforcement for full ADA compliance for impacted facilities during utility repair work.
Addressed in UDO and ASSDM recommendations.
Enforcement
Lack of greenway details and specifications.
Addressed in Chapter 5 and UDO and ASSDM recommendations.
Policy/Program Development
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION
Develop review capacity and training.
Evaluate development review staff capacity with respect to ADA Transition Plan recommendations.. Develop staff ADA review training program.
Policy/Program Development
Consider hiring an ADA review specialist, either internal or contracted.
Staff Development
/
GAP Plan
/// 193
Table 18. Focus Group Meeting Findings and Recommendations (Continued) Targeted Focus Groups: Identified Needs by Category
With project partners, there is a need for additional ADA knowledge design and construction.
Recommendation Consider ADA certification for contractors selected on City projects. Certification possibilities include design, construction, inspectors, and work zone traffic control. Provide regular training.
Investment Considerations
Policy/Program Development
Provide best practices resources on website. Include flexibility and advanced planning time for greenway alignments through large parcels. Challenges planning for greenway alignments through undeveloped parcels.
Continue to work with developments through existing density and parking bonus process for voluntary completion of greenway connections.
Policy/Program Development
Consider arrangements to match funds from development greenway easement donations to complete longer stretches of greenway with other grant funding sources.
OTHER ADA COMPLIANCE CHALLENGES Create rapid response program to enforce clearing of encroachments (trash cans, vegetation, signs, snow removal etc). Permanent obstructions such as utility poles/parking meters are covered in the UDO/ASSDM review in Appendix 12.
Policy/Program Development
Infeasible ramps require consistent database to track ADA Transition Plan and document infeasibility.
Develop a technical infeasibility form (TIF) and related submission and approval process. Develop a process for Citywide tracking / database to maintain an updated list of ramps on transition plan. Apply consistently for City, NCDOT and private projects.
Policy/Program Development
Accessible parking requests process/policy.
Develop a public accessible parking space request policy, program and website.
Policy/Program Development
Maintenance of sufficient pedestrian access route (PAR) width Competing public space elements, such as trash cans, snow, utilities, trees, parking meters, etc.
1. Update ramp inspection form to include all accessibility requirements (see best practice examples in the ASSDM review in Appendix 12.B). Inconsistent inspection and enforcement of noncompliant ramps.
2. Coordinate with NCDOT inspection forms for NCDOT streets. Establish a consistent form if possible. 3. Consider ADA certification process and training for contractors selected on City projects.
Policy/Program Development
4. Provide best practices resources on website, such as calibration of levels, pre-pour elevation checks, concrete finishing.
Complaint process and tracking that is clear and consistent.
Ensure all departments are contacting the official ADA coordinator for any ADA complaint or grievance tracking and outcome documentation. See accompanying ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan document for official grievance procedure.
Policy/Program Development
Accessible meetings and special accommodations for public meetings (need policy and process).
Develop/update meeting location checklists for ADA compliance.
Policy/Program Development
Need for official sidewalk maintenance plan document and associated policy.
See Chapter 6, Chapter 8 and Accompanying Documents: ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan Consider adopting a maintenance scan and repair process at regular intervals.
Policy/Program Development
194 /// GAP Plan /
External Policy and NCDOT Coordination Findings NCDOT is an important partner in the City’s efforts to improve walkability. There are many NCDOT policies that apply to sidewalk, bikeway, and greenway development. Similar to the City department Focus Group meetings, the team met with NCDOT representatives to discuss design standards and policies that impact the implementation and maintenance of Greenways, ADA and Pedestrian facilities within the City. Some NCDOT policies provide guidance on these issues are as follows: • Complete Streets Policy (2022) More information can be found here: https:// connect.ncdot.gov/projects/BikePed/Pages/ Complete-Streets.aspx • Greenway accommodation guidelines (2015) More information can be found here: https:// connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Teppl/ TEPPL%20All%20Documents%20Library/B06_ GWY_GDLNS.pdf • Department of Justice/Department of Transportation Joint Technical Assistance on the Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act Requirements to Provide Curb Ramps when Streets, Roads, or Highways are Altered through Resurfacing (2013) More information can be found here: https:// connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Teppl/ TEPPL%20All%20Documents%20Library/DOJDOT%20Curb%20Ramps%20and%20Resurfacing. aspx • Mid-Block Crossing Guidance (Various) More information can be found here: https:// connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Teppl/Pages/ Teppl-Topic-Original.aspx?Topic_List=C36 • Standard Practice for Pedestrian Reasonable Access Requests from Pedestrians with Qualifying Disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act (2003) More information can be found here: https:// connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Teppl/ TEPPL%20All%20Documents%20Library/ Disabled_Ped_Practice.pdf • Pedestrian Crossing Guidance (Various) More information can be found here: https:// connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Teppl/
TEPPL%20All%20Documents%20Library/ Disabled_Ped_Practice.pdf Other policies are specific to design, such as the newly updated Roadway Design Manual (2021) and the Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures document (2018). • More information can be found here: https:// connect.ncdot.gov/projects/Roadway/Pages/RDM. aspx (Roadway Design Standard Link) • More information can be found here: https:// connect.ncdot.gov/resources/Specifications/ StandSpecLibrary/2018%20Standard%20 Specifications%20for%20Roads%20and%20 Structures.pdf (Standard Specifications....) The following NCDOT policy and procedural items were identified during the Close the GAP process as having the greatest impact on the City’s ability to achieve a multimodal transportation network that is more inclusive to people of all ages and abilities. The following priority items and recommendations will require ongoing coordination between the City and NCDOT: 1. Current NCDOT policy dictates that street repaving projects should also include upgrades to curb ramps where the pedestrian access route is modified during repaving. However, this does not address non-compliant PARs at driveway aprons and mid-block sidewalk sections. Although this is standard resurfacing practice in most jurisdictions, the result is a missed opportunity for fully accessible corridors along the most high priority routes in the City (see Chapter 4 for more info on prioritization factors). During NCDOT coordination meetings, participants identified an opportunity to seek additional funding and initiate an early planning and coordination process between the City and NCDOT to combine funding with future resurfacing work to better achieve full corridor compliance. Combining this work is more cost and time efficient than completing this work as separate projects, and offers the best outcome for the traveling public. This process can help to maximize the results achieved with each transportation investment. 2. NCDOT resurfacing policy and budgets include intersection curb ramp upgrades but do not include signal equipment modifications. Ideally, curb ramps and signal push buttons should be updated at the same time to maximize ADA compliance and to allow for better designs (2
/
GAP Plan
/// 195
48
Image 48 / Temporary Traffic Control while RADTIP was Under Development
ramps per corner) and also allow for future audible pedestrian signals (APS) if ramps and push button equipment are spaced properly. As a result of this practice, when intersection curb ramps are upgraded during resurfacing projects, they may not be located in ADA compliant locations relative to signal equipment and the opportunity to provide much needed push buttons is missed. Another negative outcome may result where ramp configurations are not placed in line with signal equipment (e.g., maintaining corner ramps instead of providing one ramp per crossing with a push button). During joint meetings with City and NCDOT staff, the consensus was that additional funding will need to be pursued as a solution to this issue.
196 /// GAP Plan /
3. The NCDOT policy for audible pedestrian signal requests and limited funding make it difficult to expand the APS system in the City of Asheville to assist pedestrians with visual impairments. During NCDOT coordination meetings, an opportunity was identified to create an ADA Advisory Committee that can advise NCDOT on priority locations for APS to maximize the mobility benefits for those with vision impairments. This idea will require additional funding and committee formation discussions to ensure success. 4. During Close the GAP-related ADA focus group meetings, public engagement surveys and field observations, it was noted that work zone traffic control on City and NCDOT roadways has not
consistently maintained accessible routes, per MUTCD standards, during construction. This is a key finding that is impacting mobility throughout the City and further coordination between NCDOT and the City is needed. See accompanying Pedestrian Accommodations in Work Zones Design Guidance and Checklist document for more information on temporary traffic control accessibility guidance.
Other Resources and Design Standards Good pedestrian and bicycle design is the function of many factors, including connectivity, comfort, continuity and convenience. The following are state and national design guidance resources that collectively work to achieve these multimodal design goals for Close the GAP as well as state and national resources related to designing for people traveling with a disability. It should be noted that, as pedestrian and bicycle design is constantly evolving and innovating, updates to these resources should be sought out following the publication of Close the GAP.
Table 18. Other Resources and Design Standards
Pedestrian Guidance North Carolina Department of Transportation Complete Streets Policy A.09.0106
2019 (2022 update to methodology)
Evaluating Temporary Accommodations for Pedestrians
2018
Pedestrian Crossing Guidelines
2018
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Guide for the Planning, Design and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities
2004
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Guide for Improving Pedestrian Safety at Uncontrolled Crossing Intersections
2018
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) 2009 MUTCD Guidance and Supplemental Information (including NC Supplement)
2009
US Access Board Proposed Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG)
2011
Guide to the Standards
2010
USDOT/Department of Justice USDOT ADA Standards for Transportation Facilities
2006
DOT/DOJ Joint Technical Assistance Memos
Varies
ADA Standards
2010
Other Multimodal Design Guidance North Carolina Department of Transportation Roadway Design Manual
2021
Complete Streets Policy A.09.0106
2019 (2022 update to methodology)
/
GAP Plan
/// 197
Other Multimodal Design Guidance Greenway Accommodations Guidelines
2015
WalkBike NC: The Statewide Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan
2013
Federal Highway Administration Strategies for Accelerating Multimodal Project Delivery
2019
Small Town and Rural Multimodal Networks Design Guide
2016
Achieving Multimodal Networks
2016
Achieving Multimodal Networks: Applying Design Flexibility and Reducing Conflicts
2016
Guidebook for Developing Pedestrian and Bicycle Performance Measures
2016
National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Transit Street Design Guide
2016
Urban Street Design Guide
2013
Bicycle Guidance (When a Corridor Overlaps with Bicycle Network Needs) North Carolina Department of Transportation Complete Streets Policy A.09.0106
2019 (2022 update to methodology)
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities
2012
Federal Highway Administration Bikeway Selection Guide
2019
Incorporating On-Road Bicycle Networks into Resurfacing Projects
2016
Separated Bike Lane and Planning Design Guide
2015
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices 2009 MUTCD Guidance and Supplemental Information (including NC Supplement)
2009
National Association of City Transportation Officials Urban Bikeway Design Guide
198 /// GAP Plan /
2014
10
TAKE ACTION
“
Sidewalks, sidewalks, sidewalks! Pedestrian and bike infrastructure makes a city so livable.” “
- North Asheville Resident
10
TA K E A C T I O N Close the GAP is an action-oriented plan that is built off of community desires. For the Plan to be effective, it needs a clear approach to implementation that defines next steps, timeframe, responsible parties, key partners, and performance measures to evaluate success. This approach will allow the City to be strategic yet flexible in the lifetime of this Plan.
O RGA N IZAT IO NA L & PARTN ER FR A ME WO R K
Transportation Department staff will be responsible for overseeing the implementation of Close the GAP and progress towards performance measures. They will coordinate with the MPO and NCDOT on funding and project development as well as seek other project development opportunities.
French Broad River MPO The MPO will be responsible for coordinating funding opportunities between the City, County and NCDOT. This includes funding projects through the STIP as well as other opportunities such as through their Planning Work Program.
Buncombe County & Neighboring Jurisdictions
Close the GAP will not be implemented solely by the City of Asheville; regional and state agencies, county and neighboring communities, and the private and non-profit sectors will be critical to success. Many of these organizations have been referenced throughout this document, and key partners include the following:
Generally what matters most to people walking and rolling is a connected system that allows travel from one location to another. Most people are unaware of City or County boundaries. As such, it is prudent that the City, County and neighboring jurisdictions coordinate to ensure that their greenway and pedestrian networks connect.
Asheville City Council
Specific to Buncombe County, there is an opportunity with their Comprehensive Plan (for which an update is underway at the time of the drafting of this document) and their impending Multimodal Plan (which will be developed) to better align networks. Coordination with the County on sidewalk projects is particularly critical as areas just outside of the City limits are seeing significant growth; these are locations where sidewalks may be expanded through development. Since, in 2012, Asheville was stripped of its ability to annex property through an Extraterritorial Jurisdiction, coordination with the County will be imperative.
The City Council will adopt the Plan document and will oversee its implementation. It is also responsible for amending the UDO and other policy related decisions. City Council can make decisions related to the budget to facilitate the implementation of Close the GAP.
City Staff The responsibility for implementation of this plan at the staff level lives in the Transportation Department. However, other departments involved in implementation and policy include: Capital Projects, Public Works, Planning and Urban Design, Equity and Inclusion, Finance and Management Services, Development Services, and others.
Neighboring jurisdictions that require coordination include Woodfin, Biltmore Forest, Fletcher/Henderson
/ GAP Plan /// 201
County, and Mills River. See Map 28 for an illustration of Asheville’s neighbors that share a boundary, for which network connections will be critical.
NCDOT Division 13 As discussed in the previous chapter, there are ample opportunities to build upon coordination with Division 13 of NCDOT, which includes the City and Buncombe County. This includes projects in the STIP, resurfacing or roadway/bridge reconstruction projects, and monitoring the construction of the network.
NCDOT Integrated Mobility Division Based out of Raleigh, this division of NCDOT develops guidance on bicycle and pedestrian policy and complete streets, which is critical to project development. They may also fund future plan update funding opportunities through their grant programs, which in part funded Close the GAP.
Developers There are many details that the UDO prescribes related to development, and these offer the City a partner and opportunity to expand the pedestrian network.
Non-Profit Partners Asheville has a long and successful history of working with its non-profit partners to expand its reach and impact in the community. These relationships should be continued to enable Close the GAP to be successful. Certain non-profit partners offer funding opportunities, and others may be recipients of minigrants to better serve the community.
Community Members Similarly, Asheville has a strong history of empowering members of the community to advocate and serve. Through the many committees and commissions that guide decisions at the city, Asheville can continue to tap into the community through these volunteers. In addition, community members generate public support for walking, by talking to their neighbors, friends, colleagues, etc. They advocate to elected officials or others for better projects. Finally, members of the community volunteer at events and programs that make these projects a success.
202 /// GAP Plan /
T H E ACT ION PL AN The Close the GAP Action Plan contains 10 goals related to equity, the Greenway, ADA Transition, and Pedestrian plans, project development, policy, funding, tools, safety, and multimodal integration. The actions will shift as partner and funding opportunities change; however, the following offers a basic structure for the City to initiate these tasks. Each task is numbered, which is not based on priority but for ease of City implementation. Tasks include a brief description of the action, lead department (or departments) that will guide the task, and partner agency or organization to support the task. Timeframe refers to the approximate horizon to indicate when the task should be completed, and how success will be measured is the benchmark to indicate whether a task is completed. The action plan links various actions to project goals. Many action items could apply to multiple goals; however, they are not repeated in each section. The sum result of these actions combined are the key to achieving the Close the GAP vision where “Asheville is a place where vibrant, safe, and comfortable streets and greenways give everyone the opportunity to walk to their destinations and to enjoy the convenience and health benefits of walking.”
Map 28. Regional Connections
1
Woodfin
Mile
Beaver Lake
NORTH
26
240 240 40
40
40
Biltmore Estate
Biltmore Forest
26
CLOSE THE GAP NETWORK Greenway Network Components Pedestrian Network Components
Lake Julian
Bumcombe County Planned Greenway Regional Connection Downtown Asheville City of Asheville Area Cities
AVL Regional Airport
Fletcher
Mills River
/
GAP Plan
/// 203
Table 20. Goal 1: Equity Close the GAP network implementation results in a walkable and accessible community for all, no matter where you live or who you are.
Action #
Action
1.1
Develop a City of Asheville definition for Transportation Equity and metrics to evaluate the equity impact of transportation projects.
Plan Impact
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Lead
Partner
Transportation, Office of Equity N/A and Inclusion
Immediate (0-3 years)
How Success Will Be Measured Adopted definition of transportation equity. Metrics to evaluate the equity impact of transportation projects. Number of sidewalk gaps closed in high equity need areas.
1.2
Using Close the GAP and neighborhood input as a guide, prioritize sidewalk gaps and other pedestrian facilities in high equity need areas.
Pedestrian Plan
Transportation, CAPE, Office of Equity and Inclusion, Public Works and Capital Projects
1.3
Work with various City departments and Buncombe County to develop neighborhood stabilization plans to address pedestrian needs and gentrification concerns.
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Legacy CAPE, Planning Neighborhood Coalition, & Urban Buncombe Design County
204 /// GAP Plan /
Timeframe
Legacy Neighborhood Coalition
Ongoing
Immediate (0-3 years)
Number of neighborhood engagement points to determine preferences in addressing pedestrian gaps.
Number of neighborhood stabilization plans developed.
Table 21. Goal 2: Greenway Network City of Asheville residents and stakeholders travel along the greenway network on existing and new types of greenways. Action #
Action
2.1
Secure funding for and develop a neighborhood greenway implementation guidebook that incorporates Close the GAP recommended plan elements (See Chapter 5).
2.2
Increase amount and quality of greenway / natural surface trail information available to users through signage and online data by installing accessible trail markers.
Plan Impact
Greenway
Greenway
Lead
Partner
Timeframe
Transportation, Public Works, Planning & FBRMPO Urban Design and CAPE
Immediate (0-3 years)
Transportation
Asheville on Bikes, Connect Buncombe, Pisgah Area SORBA
Immediate (0-3 years)
How Success Will Be Measured
Development of a City of Asheville Neighborhood Greenway Guidebook
Install accessible trail makers and include information in online greenway information. Trail Guidelines in PDF 2020.pdf (accessrecreation.org) There are a variety of methods to report and benchmark physical activity:
2.3
Use greenway intercept surveys to track and report on commuting trips and physical activity.
Average minutes of physical activity per day per capita. Greenway
Transportation
Connect Buncombe
Immediate (0-3 years)
Average minutes of physical activity attributable to active transportation per day. Portion of people regularly using the greenways for active transportation. Number of walking or biking trips.
/
GAP Plan
/// 205
Table 21. Goal 2: Greenway Network (continued) Action #
Action
Plan Impact
Lead
Partner
Timeframe
How Success Will Be Measured
Mid-Range (4-6 years)
Development and deployment of notice program. Advertisement on the greenway alerts webpage. Consider a banner on other greenway webpages users can click that navigates them to the alerts and closures webpage.
Enhance City’s communication efforts about trail closures, detours, and maintenance projects.
2.4
Integrate greenways closures with the City’s alert system.
Greenway
Transportation, N/A CAPE
Use newly improved Traffic Control guidance to identify on-street rerouting for greenway closures due to construction or weather events.
2.5
Develop an ongoing greenway maintenance scan schedule for greenway corridors to ensure that routes remain accessible.
206 /// GAP Plan /
Greenway and ADA Transition
Transportation, N/A Parks, PW
Immediate (0-3 years)
Schedule/Plan development. Number of greenway accessibility repairs completed.
Table 22. Goal 3: Pedestrian Network Using Close the GAP’s ADA Transition Plan as a guide, the City of Asheville’s pedestrian network is ADA compliant to the maximum extent feasible. Action #
Action
3.1
Develop an ADA Design Checklist and Submission Requirements to include detailed elevations with ADA measurements. Set criteria less than maximum values to accommodate construction tolerances (variations).
3.2
Develop and begin using a technical infeasibility form for design and inspection to document how and why it is technically infeasible to meet ADA requirements during a development project.
Plan Impact
3.3
Partner
How Success Will Be Measured
Timeframe
ADA Transition
Transportation, Public Works, N/A Development Services
ADA Transition
Transportation, Public Works, Risk Management, N/A Development Services, Planning & Urban Design
Immediate (0-3 years)
ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Transportation, Public Works, N/A Development Services
Immediate (0-3 years)
Develop a publicly accessible portal to house technical infeasibility documents. Develop a set of ADA Training Programs aimed at designers, reviewers, and field inspectors for internal and external partners. Topics should include Technical Infeasibility Forms and Work Zone Traffic Control.
Lead
Completion of the ADA Design and Submission Requirements.
Immediate (0-3 years)
Number of trainings provided to City staff and outside developers.
Technical infeasible process and forms. Technical infeasible tracking process.
Developed training curriculum. Number of trainings provided.
/
GAP Plan
/// 207
Table 22. Goal 3: Pedestrian Network (continued) Action #
3.4
Action Form an ADA Advisory Committee of individuals with disabilities and members of organizations that serve people with disabilities. This committee may provide ADA input on items such as Audible Pedestrian Signal locations, reviewing changes to project priorities.
3.5
Track and report on ADA Transition Plan progress to document the removal of barriers from the transportation network.
208 /// GAP Plan /
Plan Impact
ADA Transition, Pedestrian
ADA Transition
Lead
Partner
NCDOT (Encourage NCDOT Transportation, membership Risk as an exManagement, officio Public Works member of the ADA Advisory Committee)
Transportation, Public Works, Capital NCDOT Projects, Risk Management
Timeframe
How Success Will Be Measured
Formation of the ADA Advisory Committee. Immediate (0-3 years)
Number of meetings of the ADA Advisory Committee. Number of projects the ADA Advisory committee provided input on.
Immediate (0-3 years) & Ongoing
As the Transition Plan is implemented, corridors and individual elements will be removed from the Transition Plan. At the end of each year, complete a program review and an annual update report summarizing completed actions and describing any changes in conditions. The report enables tracking of progress in removing accessibility barriers and achieving ADA compliance.
Table 23. Goal 4: Pedestrian Network Using Close the GAP as a guide, the pedestrians in the City of Asheville can walk from home (however one defines home) to key destinations along a network of streets comfortable for people who walk. Action #
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
Action
Use Close the GAP as a guiding plan to create a complete pedestrian network.
Complete projects in the Close the GAP high priority network to increase the number of people walking for transportation and recreation in Asheville.
Use Close the GAP priority project lists to initiate new projects into the project development process yearly to keep a steady stream of projects in development.
Initiate a pilot program for the use of alternatives to sidewalks to expand the pedestrian network.
Plan Impact
Lead
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Transportation, Public Works, Development Services, Planning and Urban Design
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Transportation, Parks and Recreation
Partner
Timeframe
How Success Will Be Measured Number of pedestrian gaps filled.
NCDOT, FBRMPO, Funding Partners
NCDOT, FBRMPO, Funding Partners
Ongoing
Number of crossing gaps filled or improved. Number of other pedestrian amenities added or improved (e.g., signals, signage). Percent of Asheville commuters walking and biking to work (using annual American Community Survey updates).
Ongoing
Number of people walking recorded in annual local counts. Number of people walking recorded in future greenway intercept surveys. Number of new projects identified for the project pipeline each year.
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Transportation, Public Works, Capital, NCDOT, Finance and Budget Department
NCDOT, FBRMPO, Funding Partners
Reporting on projects implemented: Ongoing
• Number of Pedestrian Priority Network sidewalk gaps filled. • Number of Pedestrian Priority Network crossing gaps filled or improved. Adoption of alternative sidewalk standards.
Pedestrian, ADA Transition
Transportation, Public Works
N/A
Immediate (0-3 years)
Number of interim pedestrian improvements (e.g. painted curb extensions and refuge islands, alternative pedestrian walkways constructed).
/
GAP Plan
/// 209
Table 23. Goal 4: Pedestrian Network (continued) Action #
Action
Plan Impact
Lead
Partner
Timeframe
Promote clear sidewalks through a “Keep it Clear” community education and enforcement campaign.
4.5
Create “Keep it Clear” rapid response program to enforce clearing of encroachments (e.g. trash cans, vegetation, signs, snow).
How Success Will Be Measured
Number of “Keep It Clear” points of education. Number of enforcement activities associated with the “Keep It Clear” campaign. ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Transportation, Public Works, CAPE
Neighborhood Associations, Business Associations
Immediate (0-3 years)
Number of communications educating public about sidewalk maintenance See Examples: https:// docs.google.com/ document/d/1RTmLdHLaGImtoOeCrpG_ jQU6BpwPyR2NGb TYUQ7XAk/edit U6BpwPyR2NGbTYUQ7XAk/ edit
Expand property owner education regarding responsibility for maintaining sidewalks.
Crossing opportunities can be evaluated in a number of ways — along a specific roadway, as an average measure for a particular area, or related to intersections.
4.6
Using guidance from Close the GAP, improve the number and quality of pedestrian roadway crossings across the City.
Examples of measures include: ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Transportation, NCDOT, Public Works, Capital Projects FBRMPO
Immediate (0-3 years)
Decrease linear distance along a corridor between legal crossing opportunities. Decrease linear distance along a corridor between marked crosswalks. Decrease linear distance along a corridor between signalized crossings. Increase the number of intersections with crossings of all intersection legs.
210 /// GAP Plan /
Table 23. Goal 4: Pedestrian Network (continued) Action #
Action Develop a plan/ program and schedule for routine sidewalk maintenance scans along high priority corridors to ensure that routes remain accessible.
4.7
This program may include specifics on less costly sidewalk repair methods such as patching, crackfilling, wedging, flexible pavement applications, mud-jacking, and grinding/cutting (beveling).
Plan Impact
Lead
Partner
Timeframe
How Success Will Be Measured
Develop schedule and plan. ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Transportation, N/A Public Works
Mid-Range (4-6 years)
Track scan and repair progress with ADA Transition Plan database. Expand repair methods to include lower cost solutions.
/
GAP Plan
/// 211
Table 24. Goal 5: Project Development Using Close the GAP as a guide, the City of Asheville has increased capacity to deliver quality pedestrian projects. Action #
Action
Plan Impact
Lead
Partner
Timeframe
How Success Will Be Measured
Leverage City of Asheville and NCDOT resurfacing projects to accelerate Close the GAP and complete street project implementation.
5.1
Work with departments and agencies to ensure that ADA upgrades and planned and budgeted for in resurfacing projects (e.g., right-of-way acquisition, curb ramp design, signal upgrades).
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Transportation, Public Works, NCDOT Capital Projects
Ongoing
Number of Close the GAP projects completed during resurfacing.
Since NCDOT resurfacing funds cannot be used for right-of-way purchase or utility relocations, identify sources of matching funds to partner with NCDOT on resurfacing projects to complete full corridor ADA upgrades.
5.2
5.3
Refine the City’s existing right-of-way policy and process to maximize ability ADA to achieve ADA compliance Transition and accomplish Close the GAP project implementation.
Include a schedule of City and NCDOT repaving projects in the City’s project planning and development process.
Transportation, NCDOT Public Works, (ex-officio Capital Projects involvement)
Immediate (0-3 years)
Number of ROWs identified / secured early in project planning steps.
Plan for and implement cross jurisdictional pedestrian projects.
Form working group.
Form a regular working group to coordinate Close the GAP pedestrian projects with Buncombe County and other adjoining municipal planning efforts, particularly in the City’s former extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ).
Working with Buncombe County and other municipalities, prioritize projects important to cross-jurisdictional connectivity.
As Buncombe County updates its plans and ordinances, work with the county to develop a coordinated pedestrian network in urbanized areas adjoining the City.
212 /// GAP Plan /
Greenway, Pedestrian
Transportation, Planning and Urban Design, Development Services
Buncombe County, Woodfin, Biltmore Forest, Fletcher
Ongoing
Identify and implement two to three crossjurisdictional projects in the next 5 to 10 years.
Table 24. Goal 5: Project Development (continued)
Action #
Action
5.4
Develop consensus in City departments to adopt and use the transportation project development checklist. See Chapter 8 project development checklists.
5.5
Continue project development collaboration with NCDOT by continuing the City / NCDOT monthly Pedestrian Working Group.
5.6
5.7
5.8
Continue to work with NCDOT on integration of pedestrian, bicycle, greenway facilities in accordance with the evolving NCDOT Complete Streets process.
Review the Close the GAP project lists and project status and form consensus in advance of the next round of major transportation system projects to advocate for and submit through the FBRMPO/NCDOT SPOT Process
Increase land development incentives and mechanisms available to the development community to participate in Close the GAP project development.
Plan Impact Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Lead
Partner
Transportation, Planning & Urban Design, FBRMPO, Public Works, NCDOT Development Services, Capital Projects
Timeframe
Immediate (0-3 years)
How Success Will Be Measured
Resolution of departmental adoption.
Number of monthly meetings in a year. Transportation
NCDOT
Transportation, Planning & Urban Design, Public Works, NCDOT Development Services, Capital Projects
Number of projects advanced through the Pedestrian Working Group.
Ongoing
Use of NCDOT Complete Streets Checklists with project development – adapt as needed.
Ongoing
Integration of Close the GAP project in NCDOT Project Development. There are a number of ways to track progress, examples include:
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Transportation, City Council
NCDOT, FBRMPO
Number of projects from adopted corridor studies.
Ongoing
Number of projects developed in partnership with NCDOT.
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Transportation, Development Services, Planning & Urban Design
NCDOT
Increase the number (or percentage) of the Close the GAP projects implemented through private development.
Ongoing
Decrease in the number of ADA noncompliant sidewalks and curb ramps.
/
GAP Plan
/// 213
Table 25. Goal 6: Policy Using Close the GAP as a guide, the City of Asheville has updated and new policies to guide pedestrian and greenway network development.
Action #
6.1
6.2
Action
Using the detailed review of the City’s UDO included with Close the GAP, update the UDO to facilitate pedestrian network implementation (Appendix 12.A). Using the detailed review of the City’s ASSDM included with Close the GAP, update the ASSDM to facilitate pedestrian network implementation. Expand the number and types of pedestrian-oriented tools available in the ASSDM (Appendix 12.B).
6.3
6.4
Work with Planning and Urban Design to evaluate current lighting standards and update standards as needed to increase lighting in high pedestrian areas, at crossings, and along greenways. Working with the City’s legal department (and other departments as needed), investigate utility agreements to reduce utility obstructions in the Public Access Route (PAR).
Plan Impact
6.5
214 /// GAP Plan /
Partner
Timeframe
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Transportation, Public Works, Planning & N/A Urban Design, Development Services
Updated Immediate UDO (0-3 years) standards.
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Transportation, Public Works, Planning & N/A Urban Design, Development Services
Updated Immediate SSDM (0-3 years) standards.
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Transportation, Planning & Urban Design, Duke Energy Public Works, Development Services
Updated lighting Immediate standards (0-3 years) in the UDO and SSDM. Revised agreements with utility companies.
ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Legal, Public Works, Development Services
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Transportation, Updated Public Works, Development Immediate policy and Development Community (0-3 years) guidebook. Services
Strengthen enforcement to ensure that utility company work within the public right-of-way is ADA compliant. Improve work zone traffic control for pedestrians with an updated policy and development of a work zone traffic control handbook. Utilize work zone traffic control checklist (See Accompanying Document: Pedestrian Accommodations in Work Zone Design Guidance and Checklist).
Lead
How Success Will Be Measured
Utility Companies
Immediate (0-3 years) Revised standards for work in the public right-of-way.
Table 25. Goal 5: Policy (continued)
Action #
6.6
Action
Update the Neighborhood Sidewalk program using Close the GAP as a guide. Include neighborhood greenways and alternatives to sidewalks (See Accompanying Document: Pedestrian Accommodations in Work Zone Design Guidance and Checklist)
Plan Impact
ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Lead
Partner
Transportation, Capital N/A Projects, Public Works
Timeframe
How Success Will Be Measured Update guidance to align with Close the GAP plans.
Immediate Increase (0-3 years) the annual amount of funding allocated for this program.
/
GAP Plan
/// 215
Table 26. Goal 7: Funding The City of Asheville has identified adequate, consistent, and wide-ranging funding sources to implement the Close the GAP Network. Action #
Action
7.1
Increase the general fund annual allocation for Close the GAP network implementation.
7.2
Increase the general fund annual allocation for ADA Transition plan implementation.
Plan Impact
Lead
Partner
Timeframe
How Success Will Be Measured
Greenway, Pedestrian
Transportation, Finance & N/A Management, City Council
Track annual allocation Immediate dedicated (0-3 years) for network implementation.
ADA Transition
Transportation, Finance & Management, N/A Risk Management, City Council
Track annual Immediate allocation (0-3 years) dedicated for ADA Transition Plan implementation. Track adopted measures resulting in dedicated funding sources.
7.3
Explore options to secure a dedicated funding source for Close the GAP implementation.
7.4
To address funding needs for unexpected projects and partner or grant matching funds, identify a source of set aside funds (or a quick response policy) to respond to partnership opportunities.
7.5
Establish a method to encourage developer / other partner participation in greenway design and construction. Explore opportunities to use developer participation as matching funds for other funding sources.
216 /// GAP Plan /
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Transportation, Budget, City N/A Council
Transportation, Budget, City N/A Council
Use a measure to Mid – benchmark active Range (4-6 transportation years) funding: per capita investment, proposed miles, active transportation mode split. Track the value of set aside Mid-Range funds available to (4-6 years) respond to grant and partnership opportunities.
Developed policy. Greenway
Transportation, Development Legal Community
Immediate Amount of (0-3 years) developer participation.
Table 27. Goal 8: Tools Using a variety of existing and new technology and communication tools, the City of Asheville and its residents and stakeholders are informed about Close the GAP implementation progress and can interact with the City to request / share emerging needs.
Action #
Action
Plan Impact
8.1
Update the Asheville App (or similar) where records, City responses, and actions taken are visible to the public and data from the App can assist with City decisions.
8.2
The City is required to track and annually report on its ADA Transition Plan progress. Working with the City’s IT / GIS departments, develop a systematic project tracking system for data entry when corridors are evaluated for detailed ADA compliance, as well as uploading ADA design checklists, inspection forms, and Technically Infeasible Forms (TIFs).
8.3
Update the City public meeting checklists to ensure ADA compliance at public meetings. The checklist should include a list of accessible meetings locations, special ADA accommodations resources Transition and use policy. Also identify Plan a funding pool to hire American Sign Language interpreters, creation of accessible documents, and respond to other accommodations requests.
CAPE, Risk Management, Finance & Management
8.4
Develop a policy, process and program that includes ADA an easy-to-use web-based Transition tool that allows residents to Plan request accessible parking locations.
Transportation, Parking Services, IT & N/A GIS, CAPE
Lead
Partner
Timeframe
Updated App
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
ADA Transition Plan
How Success Will Be Measured
To be determined.
N/A
Information Technology, GIS, Transportation, N/A Development Services
Immediate (0-3 years)
Immediate (0-3 years)
Examples of how data is used in transportation decisions.
Launch of the ADA Transition Plan tracking tool. Annual reporting per ADA Transition Plan for the Public Rightof-Way.
Developed Policy Meetings held in fully accessible locations. N/A
Immediate (0-3 years)
Immediate (0-3 years)
Accomodations provided (e.g. sign language interpreters or audible format of materials).
Accessible parking request policy and process. Accessible parking request tool.
/
GAP Plan
/// 217
Table 27 Goal 8: Tools (continued)
Action #
Action
8.5
Develop a single landing portal / communication dashboard (such as the dashboard used to report on bond project process) to provide Close the GAP project development updates and information, communication about the development process, and project engagement opportunities.
8.6
To build the case for active transportation funding and program expansion, expand the City’s regular pedestrian counting systems and practices to include point in time counts as well as permanent counts.
218 /// GAP Plan /
Plan Impact
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Lead
Partner
Transportation, Capital Projects, IT & N/A GIS, CAPE
Transportation, Bike/Ped Task FBRMPO Force
Timeframe
How Success Will Be Measured
Ongoing
Launch of the project portal.
Ongoing
Standard practices for manually and/ or automatically counting pedestrians in place Additional data sets for use in reporting out for project funding and needs analyses.
Table 28. Goal 9: Safety As a result of implementing pedestrian safety best practices, pedestrian crashes in the City are significantly reduced. Action #
Action
9.1
Using strategies in and implementing projects from Close the GAP, reduce number of pedestrian crashes of all injury types.
9.2
Significantly reduce pedestrian crashes resulting in death or serious injury by developing and implementing a citywide Vision Zero strategy.
Plan Impact Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Lead
Partner
Transportation, Public Works, NCDOT Asheville Police Department Transportation, Public Works, NCODT Asheville Police Department
How Success Will Be Measured
Timeframe
Immediate (0-3 years)
Immediate (0-3 years)
Reduction in crash rates.
Adoption of a Vision Zero Action Plan. Implemented Vision Zero action items. Development of a share the road campaign. Examples: “Driving Change” from Grand Rapids, Michigan. http:// grdrivingchange.org/
9.3
Promote a shared sense of civility among all roadway users through share the road / safe road behavior programming.
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Transportation, CAPE, NCDOT
FBRMPO
Mid – Range (4-6 years)
“Everyone is a Pedestrian”, US Dept. of Transportation. https://www. trafficsafetymarketing. gov/get-materials/ pedestrian-safety/ everyone-pedestrian “Heads Up”, Eureka, California. https://bit. ly/3J505fh San Francisco MTA safety campaigns: https://www.sfmta. com/educationcampaigns
/
GAP Plan
/// 219
Table 28. Goal 9: Safety (continued)
Action #
Action
9.4
During Close the GAP, the team discovered inconsistencies between crash data provided by the City of Asheville Police Department and data available through PBIN. Work is needed to identify the source of these inconsistencies (for example, race is missing for many crashes reported through the PBIN where that data is available through the City). Recommendation is to correct inconsistencies between NCDOT, PBIN and City of Asheville crash statistics to better support crash analytics for more accurate safety evaluations. Also recommend that that the Police Department be tasked with making sure that the injury type gets updated on the reports if conditions change so that the crash data is accurate. A task force can investigate the inconsistencies and provide further recommendations.
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
9.5
Improve pedestrian safety along corridors with high safety scores and known crash history by using pedestrian countermeasures such as those identified in the Close the GAP plan and document in other national guidance.
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
220 /// GAP Plan /
Plan Impact
Lead
Partner
Transportation, Asheville Police NC Department, Highway Asheville Fire Patrol Department
Transportation
NCDOT
Timeframe
How Success Will Be Measured
Immediate (0-3 years)
Corrected inconsistencies between NCDOT, PBIN and City of Asheville crash statistics to better support crash analytics for more accurate safety evaluations.
Ongoing
Number of projects identified or implemented in along high crash corridors.
Table 29. Goal 10: Multimodal Vision Close the GAP is integrated with other multimodal plans and programs to reach the City’s overall multimodal vision. Action #
Action
10.1
To integrate the areas where Close the GAP overlaps with City bicycling goals, update the City of Asheville’s Bicycle Plan.
10.2
As noted in the City’s SSDM, incorporate additional Complete Streets Design Guidance to standardize complete streets element selection, context considerations and design details for elements that enhance the quality of the pedestrian experience and the balancing of all modes within the City’s right-of-way.
10.3
Develop an updated policy to address the use of e-devices (scooters, ebikes, Onewheels, etc.) on public streets, sidewalks, and greenways.
10.4
10.5
Plan Impact
Lead
Partner
Timeframe
How Success Will Be Measured
FBRMPO, NCDOT Integrated Mobility Division
Immediate (0-3 years)
An integrated and updated bicycle plan.
Greenway
Transportation
Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Transportation, Planning & Urban Design, Public Works, NCDOT Development Services, Capital Projects
Mid-Range (4-6 years)
Updated design manual.
ADA Transition, Pedestrian
Transportation, Public Works
N/A
Immediate (0-3 years)
An adopted e-device use policy.
Work with partners to update the City’s Greenway, pedestrian and greenway Pedestrian wayfinding system.
Transportation, Planning & Urban Design, Public Works
Buncombe County TDA, Funding Partners
Mid-Range (4-6 years)
Expanded and implemented pedestrian wayfinding system.
Encourage more programs, events, and projects that create a car-free environment.
Greenway,
Greenway, Pedestrian
Transportation, Parks and Recreation
FBRMPO, Community Ongoing Organizations
Number of open streets events per year. Number of car-free streets (temporarily or permanently closed to cars).
/
GAP Plan
/// 221
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
11
APPENDICES
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
CLOSE THE GAP APPENDIX REFERENCE Appendix #
Name
1
Glossary of Transportation Terms
2
FBRMPO Long Duration Pedestrian Counts
3
Existing Plan Document Review
4
Committee and Engagement Tracking
5
Greenway Intercept Survey
6
Online Survey Results
7
Destination and Equity Score and Methodology
8
Greenway Plan Constraint Analysis
9
Corridor Specific Analysis: Beaverdam and West Asheville Greenway
10
ADA and Pedestrian Project Lists
11
Funding Guide
12
UDO and ASSDM Review 12.A
UDO Review
12.B
ASSDM Review
ACCOMPANYING DOCUMENTS Asheville Unpaved Guidebook Alternatives to Sidewalks Guidebook Pedestrian Accommodations in Work Zones Design Guidance and Checklist ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
CLOSE THE GAP APPENDIX 1: GLOSSARY OF TRANSPORTATION TERMS
Glossary of Transportation Terms AASHTO: American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials, a non-profit and nonpartisan association which publishes specifications, test protocols and guidelines that are used in highway design and construction throughout the United States. ADA: Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in employment, programs and services provided by state and local governments, goods and services provided by private companies, and in commercial facilities. Related to the built environment, the law mandates that a site, building, facility, or trail complies with the ADA Accessibility Guidelines and can be approached, entered, and used by people with disabilities. AIM (Asheville in Motion): AIM is a planning process intended to consolidate a variety of modal plans into a cohesive strategy and to express a method for prioritizing transportation investments in a manner consistent with desired outcomes. Alternative Transportation: modes of transportation, such as taking public transit, bicycling or walking, which are alternatives to automobile travel. Amenities: features that add to a good walking street. These are the aspects that make a street nice: street trees, plantings, bike racks, etc. Approaches (left or right): the areas of the sidewalk leading to the ramp. At-Grade Crossing: refers to a trail /roadway intersection where trail users are routed to cross the road, rather than above (pedestrian bridge) or below (tunnel).
1
Audible Pedestrian Signals: devices at intersections with traffic lights that help people with low or no vision to know when it is safe to cross the street. There is an audible tone that indicates the location of the pedestrian push button, as well as whether the push button has been activated and a tone/noise that indicates to the user whether it is safe to cross. Bollards: posts of varying material (plastic, metal, wooden concrete) that are designed to restrict vehicular access to a trail. Bicycle Boulevard: low-volume streets that are enhanced for bicycle travel through pavement markings, signage, traffic calming, intersection crossing treatments. These enhance the already calm and quiet nature of neighborhood streets and are intended to be comfortable for people of all ages and abilities. Bike Lane: a travel lane that is striped a minimum of 5 feet and designated for bicycle use only. They are typically one-way treatments that carry bicycle traffic in the same direction as an adjacent motor vehicle lane. Bike lanes are identified with signage, striping and other pavement markings. Bike lanes can have parking adjacent. Bike Route: roadways that are identified, often through signage, as preferred for bicycles. Buffer: any type of natural or constructed barrier (trees, shrubs, berms or fences) used between a sidewalk, bike lane or greenway and adjacent lands to minimize impacts (physical or visual). Buffered Bike Lane: a bike lane with a horizontal buffer separating the bike lane and vehicle travel lane. This buffer is painted on the pavement and is typically wider than 2’. It is intended to enhance safety and comfort. Busy Street: streets that have a lot of traffic, are wide, and/or where the speed is fast (35 mph or more). Examples include: Tunnel Road, Patton Avenue, Hendersonville Road, Merrimon Avenue. City Connector Streets: from the Asheville in Motion Mobility Plan, this is a street that offers a balance between providing local land access and moving people and goods. These streets have lower travel speeds and traffic volumes than Workhorse Streets (i.e. Haywood Rd). City Walkways: streets that are well-traveled by pedestrians and connect districts within the City, such as Clingman Ave. Climbing Lane: hybrid bicycle facilities on two-way streets that include a bike lane on the up-hill side of the street and a shared lane marking on the other side. The bicycle lane allows the slower moving, uphill bicyclist to have a dedicated lane to travel that is separated from motor vehicles who can more easily travel uphill. The shared lane marking on the downhill side is more acceptable since the speed difference between people riding a bicycle and driving is not as great. As with all
2
bicycle facilities, the street characteristics (speed, volume) need to be considered when a facility such as this is evaluated. Comfortable: while what is comfortable for one person is different for another, when we say “comfortable” we mean that the places where you walk feel safe, unstressed, and where you may even enjoy yourself while walking. Complete Streets: Complete Streets are designed and operated to create safe and convenient access for all users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, motorists, and transit riders of all ages and abilities. Balancing the needs of all users can be challenging, but it is important. All Complete Streets have the same goals, but they don’t all look alike. Asheville’s City Council adopted a Complete Streets policy in 2012. Connectivity: connectivity links people with the destinations they want to travel to via comfortable and accessible streets or greenways. Continuity is critical to connectivity, such as continuous sidewalks with no gaps. For people walking, biking or using a mobility device, connectivity is particularly important because it contributes to a more comfortable and safe travel experience. As more streets and greenways are connected, and as the network is realized, the benefits of each element is greatly enhanced. Crosswalks: area where it is safe for a pedestrian to cross. It is typically marked with paint and can take many different forms, such as two parallel lines (called a transverse crosswalk), continental/zebra crosswalk which appears like a series of bars, or a ladder crosswalk which is similar to a continental/zebra crosswalk but with parallel lines on both sides (like a ladder). Curb Extension: also known as “bulb-outs”, these are an enlargement of the sidewalk to make crossing or boarding a bus easier. At crossings, they increase the ability of a person driving to see people waiting to cross the street, shorten the distance that a pedestrian needs to cross the street, and provides extra space for pedestrians to wait to cross. Curb Ramp: Sloped surfaces that connect the sidewalk to the street. These are disability access features and must meet requirements related to slope, width, location and surface treatments. Ramps allow people using a mobility device to mount and dismount sidewalk curbs. Ramps can include the following forms: ● Perpendicular Ramp – The ramp is perpendicular to the street to be crossed. ● Parallel Ramp – The ramp is parallel to the street to be crossed. ● Combination Ramp – The ramp has two sections, one of which is parallel and one of which is perpendicular to the street to be crossed. ● Diagonal Ramp – The ramp serves pedestrians crossing two intersecting streets and lies at a 45 degree angle to both streets. ● Built-Up Ramp – The ramp is constructed on the side of the curb and is built up to the level of the sidewalk.
3
●
Blended Transition – The entire corner of the intersecting streets is sloped toward the intersection.
Destination Point: location of interest that attracts people to it. Detectable Warning Surface (aka Truncated Domes): a distinctive surface pattern of domes detectable by cane or underfoot that alert people with vision impairments of their approach to street crossings and hazardous drop-offs. Easement: grants the right to use a specific portion of land for a specific purpose or purposes. Easements may be limited to a specific period of time, granted in perpetuity or predicated upon the occurrence of a specific event. An easement agreement survives transfer of landownership and is generally binding upon future owners until it expires on its own terms. Equity Focus Areas: areas of the City where people who most need to rely on walking, transit or biking for transportation live, work, or access services. Facility: a general term denoting improvements and provisions made to accommodate or encourage bicycling or walking, including bikeways, bike parking, sidewalks, or crosswalks. Flare: for curb ramps that are within sidewalks or other pedestrian paths, this is a sloped surface creating a transition between the sidewalk and the ramp. Flared Sides: when the sides of a curb ramp end in sloped panels that create a gradual transition between the ramp and the adjacent sidewalk. Flat Edges: when the sides of a curb ramp are flat, similar to a sidewalk. Floodplain: the lowland that borders a stream, creek, river, or water conveyance and is subject to flooding when the stream overflows its banks (1% chance each year of being flooded). Future Lane Use: city planners need to know which areas of a city are used for which purpose. Therefore, they produce a map of "land use", that identifies parts of a city and the major activities (land use) that happen there. The future land use map is a projection into the future for land use in a city. Freeway (or Expressway): a multi-lane road where access (i.e. driveways and entrances/exit) are controlled. These roads typically carry more traffic regionally, are higher speed and intended for longer distance travel (i.e. I-240). French Broad River Metropolitan Planning Organization (FBRMPO): a partnership between local and state government that makes decisions about transportation planning in urbanized areas and meets planning requirements established by federal legislation for 4
transportation funding. In addition, FBRMPO is required to prepare long range transportation plans for the planning area with a minimum 20-year horizon. Additional tasks include developing an annual planning work program and assistance in prioritization of projects to be included in the State Transportation Improvement Program (NCDOT’s funding for a 10-year period). FBRMPO was created in 1962 as the region centered around Asheville continued to experience growth and reached a population of 50,000 which constitutes the federally-mandated threshold for a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). The MPO currently serves over 414,000 people across 21 municipalities. Good Walking Street: a street that has the facilities you need to feel comfortable walking down the street. Green Infrastructure: is an approach to water management that protects, restores, or mimics the natural water cycle. Using various strategies, green infrastructure reduces and treats stormwater at its source while delivering environmental, social, and economic benefits. Greenway: a linear corridor of natural land, usually following features such as rivers, old railroad lines or utility lines, which is used for conservation, recreation, or alternative transportation purposes. Greenspace: natural areas, open spaces, parks, trails, and greenways that function for both wildlife and people. Gutter: the paved channel between the ramp/curb and the street that is designed for drainage of water. Hard Surface: trails with surfaces that use paved materials or other firm and stable surfaces that are capable of supporting wheels and accessibility. High Density Residential Areas: areas of the city that have a greater concentration of housing that serves more people, such as apartments, condominiums, or town houses. Landing: the flat area on the top or bottom of a ramp that is used by pedestrians to change direction of travel. Low Density Residential Areas: areas of the city that have housing that serves standalone homes typically occupied by individual families. Master Plan: a blueprint for the future expansion and implementation. It will identify economic and other factors such as utility infrastructure development, planning, acquisition design guidelines and sustainability.
5
Major City Walkways: streets that are well-traveled by pedestrians and connect to many destinations and to transit, such as Broadway St in downtown Asheville. Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP): this is a 25-year look into the future that forecasts changes in the region and seeks to identify transportation improvements needed to keep travelers and goods moving smoothly and how to pay for those improvements. Mode (of Transportation): a method of movement of people or goods, such as walking or biking. Mode Share (Mode Split): the percent of people that use a particular mode of transportation. Multimodal: modes of transportation, such as public transit, bicycle, or walking; alternative to automobile travel. Multi-Use Sidepath: see Shared Use Path or Trail (below). MUTCD: the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) is published by the US Department of Transportation and provides a uniform code for signage systems used in the construction and operation of transportation systems, including those for people walking and biking. Natural Surface: trails with surfaces that are made of natural material, such as compacted dirt, wood chips or stones. Neighborhood Collector Streets: from the Asheville in Motion Mobility Plan, this is a street that connects neighborhood traffic to points within and between existing neighborhoods. Neighborhood Greenways: A calm residential street with fewer numbers of cars and slower speeds like you might experience on a traditional greenway. While not a designated facility in the sense that a traditional greenway is, a neighborhood greenway occurs on an existing neighborhood street to improve safety, help people cross busy streets, and keep speeds low. They take a current residential street and make it even better for people walking and biking. Neighborhood Streets (also known as ‘Locals’ in the AIM Plan): streets where people live and lead the way to business areas. Examples include: Raleigh Rd., Jeffress Ave., Vermont Ave. Neighborhood Walkways: streets that are popular walking routes within neighborhoods and offer good connection from various destinations, such as Hillside St. Network: in the case of Close the GAP, a network comprises the streets and greenways that connect to offer designated places for people to bicycle and walk (for the purpose of this Plan, 6
‘walking’ is assumed to include wheeling, rolling, or using any other mobility device). A network usually starts out as a vision of how streets can accommodate multimodal options, and this vision is accomplished incrementally through the construction of accessible sidewalks and greenways. While every street in a community may eventually have multimodal transportation elements, the streets in the network are typically prioritized for these investments and offer connectivity to destinations that are desired by community members seeking multimodal transportation options. Off-Road Facilities: trails that are physically separated from motorized vehicular traffic by an open space, elevation or barrier. On-Road Facilities: extensions of the existing street system right-of-way, offering users the choice of sidewalks or bike facilities. Paved Shoulder: an extension of the pavement adjacent to a travel lane. Pedestrian District: areas that are prioritized for people walking, and the streets are designed in such a way to ensure pedestrians are comfortable. It may include wide sidewalks, streets that are for pedestrians-only, and features for pedestrians such as benches. Pedestrian Crossing: Locations where a pedestrian may legally cross the street and where curb ramps must be provided. Crossings can occur at intersections or mid-block locations and may be accompanied by signs, paint markings (e.g. crosswalks) and traffic control (e.g. stop signs, traffic lights or flashing devices) Pedestrian Push Button: a device at a traffic light that can be used by a pedestrian to activate the walk/don’t walk pedestrian signal. It is typically located at arm’s length of a seated pedestrian and can be pushed to activate the signal. Pedestrian Signal Head: some intersections have these mounted on the traffic light, and they are intended to communicate to the person walking whether it is safe to walk. When it is safe to walk the signal typically has a white human figure displayed. When it is not safe to begin walking, the signal typically displays an orange flashing hand; if someone is mid-way in the crosswalk when the flashing hand appears, this is intended to warn the person that the signal will soon change and they should finish quickly. When it is not safe to walk at all, the orange hand appears steady and does not flash. At most intersections, the pedestrian signal is activated by a push button, but sometimes the signal automatically comes up without having to push a button. Protected Bike Lane (aka Separated Bike Lane/Cycletrack): Physically separated facility from the roadway and the sidewalk, intended for the exclusive use of people on bikes. The separation usually takes the form of curbing or other vertical elements. Rail-to-Trail: a public shared-use path (paved or natural) created along an inactive or abandoned rail corridor. 7
Rail-with-Trail: any shared-use path that is located on or directly adjacent to an active railroad or fixed route transit corridor. Railbank(ing): retaining a rail corridor for future railroad uses after service has been discontinued. The National Trails System Act, Sec. 8d, provides for interim public use of the corridor, allowing the establishment of recreational trails. Returned Curb: when the sides of a ramp end in distinct curbs similar to the curb of a street. Riparian Zone: an area of vegetation that is strongly influenced by water and that occurs adjacent to streams, shorelines, and wetlands. Road Diet: a technique in transportation planning where the number of travel lanes and/or effective width of the road is reduced in order to achieve safety, traffic and multimodal benefits. A traditional road diet is to convert a street from four lanes to three lanes with bike lanes. Shared Streets: a street which is intended to be shared by people walking, biking and driving. These are low volume, low speed streets that do not have dedicated travel lanes for people walking, biking or driving. Sharrow: also known as a shared-lane arrow, a marking that includes a symbol of a bicycle and two “chevron” arrows to indicate the approximate area that a person on a bicycle may travel in a roadway. Shared-Use Trail or Path: any corridor that is designed to accommodate various uses including bicycling, walking, jogging, hiking, rollerblading, horseback riding; the trail should meet AASHTO standards. Sidepath: a two-way shared use path located immediately adjacent and parallel to a roadway. Sidewalk: a designated space along the side of a road for use by pedestrians. Sidewalk System: when we say "system of sidewalks" we mean sidewalks, curb ramps, crossing signals, crosswalks and other things that help pedestrians get around the City. Signed Bike Route: these are roadways that are designated as a part of the bike network with dedicated signage; sharrows often are installed on the pavement of these roadways. Spot Safety Program: An NCDOT funding program for small projects that will reduce crashes, injuries, and fatalities by reducing the potential for and severity of these incidents on public roadways.
8
State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP): required by federal law, this is a multi-year plan that identifies the construction funding for and scheduling of transportation projects throughout the state. Strategic Prioritization (SPOT): this is NCDOTs project prioritization process based on the Strategic Transportation Investments Law. Striped Shoulder: roadways without curb and gutter may include a striped shoulder that is provided and can be used by people on bikes or people walking. Tactile Pedestrian Signal: These are devices at intersections with traffic lights that help people with low or no sight to know when it is safe to cross the street and which direction the particular push button serves.The device is a part of the push button, and has a raised arrow pointing in the direction of travel which vibrates when it is safe to begin walking. Trail: route on land or water with protected status and public access for recreation or transportation purposes, such as walking, jogging, hiking, bicycling, rollerblading, horseback riding, canoeing and kayaking. Trailhead: a designated public access point along a greenway which can include bicycle and paved or gravel automobile parking, restroom facilities, drinking fountains, signage, benches and picnic tables. Trail Tread: the surface of a trail. Uncomfortable: while what is uncomfortable for one person is different for another, when we say “uncomfortable” we mean the places where you are walking does not feel safe, is a stressful experience, and you only walk it because you don’t have a lot of options. Volume: a term used to survey the number of vehicles (traffic), pedestrians or bicycles crossing a section of road during a selected period of time. Walking Path: a linear route for general pedestrian use that is not a sidewalk and may not meet AASHTO standards, often found in parks. Wide Curb Lane: a lane where there is no designated bike lane and where the outside travel lane is wider than the usual lane width. Workhorse Street: from the Asheville in Motion Mobility Plan, this is a multi-lane street that can include a landscaped center median, requires separation between people walking and biking and the travelway, and accommodates traffic in and out of the city (i.e. Leicester Highway).
9
CLOSE THE GAP APPENDIX 2: LONG DURATION PEDESTRIAN COUNTS
French Broad River Greenway East Pedestrian Count Time Period: 6 weeks (42 days) between Wednesday, October 21, 2020
– Wednesday,
December 2, 202o
Location: Newly completed section of greenway near the Riverside Dr/Lyman St roundabout
Image: Google Maps
Results Total Users Users per Day (average) Users per Hour (average) Peak Day (24 hour usage) Peak 2-Hour Period (average) Minimum Day (24 hour usage)
29, 944 713 30 Saturday, November 21st (1,209) 12:00pm – 2:00pm Monday, November 30th (489)
French Broad River MPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 1
Equipment: Eco-Counter Pyro Counter The Pyro Counter is able to count bicyclists, pedestrians, skateboarders, rollerbladers, or anyone who passes within approximately 16.5 feet of the equipment. However, the device is unable to differentiate between the different users and simply counts them as general users. The counter is bi-directional and accounts for users in both directions. Possible sources of error include facility-users walking side-byside or very close to each other; this is likely to include people walking or running side-by-side, children being held by a parent or walking along side of them, or dense groups of users. It is unclear how many users are likely to have been missed due to these circumstances and there has been no effort to make up for this likely discrepancy.
Patterns of Use This section of multi-use path was completed in 2020 as part of the RADTIP. Parallel to this section is a dedicated cycle-track whose users would not be accounted for in this report.
The first chart shows users/day. It is clear the weekends saw the highest use, with Saturday being the peak day and Wednesday having the least users.
Image: FBRMPO
Number of Users
Users/Day 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0
6,597
7,218 6,051
4,183 1,990
2,005
1,900
French Broad River MPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 2
The following chart illustrates the average count share by time of day (24 hour clock time). This includes both weekday and weekend data. The peak time, on average, is between 2:00pm-4:00pm with around 13% of users utilizing the greenway at that time.
16.00% 14.00% 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 0.00%
0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00
PERCENTAGE OF DAILY USERS
Average Hourly Use
This chart illustrates the different pattern of usage between the weekday and weekend. Both times seem to have similar patterns of users on the greenway, which may be attributable to milder weather occurring in November and shorter daylight hours.
Weekday vs. Weekend Usage Weekend
16.00% 14.00% 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 0.00%
0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00
PERCENTAGE OF DAILY USERS
Weekday
French Broad River MPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 3
Weather and Notes October 2020
November 2020 – Highest count day outlined
Source: Weather Underground
French Broad River MPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 4
Updated Report on the 2019 Bike and Pedestrian Count Each year the Asheville Bike-Pedestrian Task Force administers a survey for which we tabulate the number of pedestrians and cyclists entering intersections. Typical surveys start at 5 PM and last for two hours. These are done on Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday of the second full week in September. (The volunteer chooses the day.) We also do a few surveys in the mornings of one of those days. These are from 7 to 9. We also survey Greenways on Saturday mornings from 9 to 11. When we have enough volunteers. All volunteers go through some training to maintain consistency. This year the dates for the surveys were Sept. 10 – Sept 12, and September 14. We had 27 volunteers collecting data on 23 sites. On Monday the 9th we gave one workshop which had 4 attendees. Most volunteers had previous experience, and for newcomers we did have online resources. Results Initially we had 27 volunteers sign up which was sufficient to cover all our top priority sites. The weather for the week of the survey was sunny and warm, a pleasant change from previous years. As in the past, we asked volunteers to count all pedestrians (including those on wheelchairs or in strollers), all cyclists (e-bikes counted as cyclists), and any other nonmotorized means of transportation that interred the intersection. Volunteers sent the results via phones to the coordinator (me), and I tabulated and summarized the findings in this report. In Table 1, I combined data into general groups (2 downtown areas, W.T. Weaver Blvd, Chestnut St, Haywood Rd, Hilliard St.) and compared the results to the past five-year average. The key results were: • • • •
Bike counts were similar to earlier years, but 44% higher than last year (weather was better). Pedestrian counts were up in some areas, but overall there was little change. Percentage of female cyclists (now at 30%) was sharp increase over last year. Helmet use has increased from 72% to 78%. (Note: Almost all female cyclists wore helmets.)
Table 1: Comparison of count data to previous 5 Year Average by Regions.
Region
Bike Count 2014-18 2019
Pedestrian Count 2014-18 2019
Downtown (Woodfin & Roundabout) 22 20 146 Downtown (College St.) 29 36 949 South Slope (Hilliard Ave) 20 20 228 West Asheville (Haywood Rd.) 48 45 202 106 Chestnut St. Corridor 17 11 84 North Asheville (W.T.Weaver Blvd) 27 20 27 49 137 Greenway (Saturday)* *Only one Greenway (WT Weaver) surveyed in 2019
157 808 297 352 62 64
136
Statistical Comments There is a high degree of variation between observations and one should be very careful in interpreting any changes. Weather, scheduled special events, and group activities can cause large shifts in numbers that are not trend related. Example of this are the downtown counts. These range from 300 to 700 people per hour. Numbers that distort any attempts at overall averages. Additional Comments •
Several people noted various assorted electric assisted vehicles, including scooters and hover boards. At the intersection on Chestnut and Broadway, pedestrians had trouble determining which button was needed for their choice of crosswalk. Running stop signs seems to be a major problem at the intersection on Banks St. and Coxe Ave.
• •
Table 2: Complete Bike Count Data Street 1
Street 2
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
Central Ave
Woodfin
20
52
49
18
10
22
College St
Oak St. (Rndbt)
16
14
24
3
--
17
College St
Lexington
38
31
22
11
--
34
--
--
--
7
--
22
College St
College St
Haywood St.
27
37.5
45
31
19
38
Hilliard Ave
S. Lexington
--
--
--
14
4
23
Hilliard Ave
Coxe Ave
25
31
--
13
16
15
Hilliard Ave
S. French Broad Ave.
55
80
--
20
20
31
Coxe Ave
Banks Ave
--
--
--
7
--
10
Chestnut St
Charlotte
30
22
14
13
7
10
Chestnut St
Merrimon Ave
23
14
11
11
3
7
Chestnut St
Broadway
38
18
26
14
10
17
WT Weaver
Merrimon Ave
26
13
17
15
5
6
WT Weaver
Greenway (Rndbt)
38
29
32
31
22
35
2
30
50
28
26
49
WT Weaver
Lexington
Greenway
AM
Sat
WT Weaver
Broadway
58
31
39
--
13
18
Riverside Dr
Lyman
18
23
26
14
19
24
Haywood Rd
Clingman (Rndbt)
34
55
54
26
20
--
--
21
26
21
--
21
Haywood Rd
Clingman (Rndbt)
AM
Haywood Rd
Craven
41
54
48
43
--
56
Haywood Rd
Brevard
74
52
--
32
23
46
Haywood Rd
Vermont
67
58
44
36
53
33
Patton Ave
Louisiana
5
1
2
4
--
3
Tunnel Rd
Riceville
5
2
1
--
--
2
Table 3: Complete Pedestrian Count Data Street 1
Street 2
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
Central Ave
Woodfin
128
135
170
141
108
151
College St
Oak St. (Rndbt)
120
135
191
177
--
163
College St
Lexington
833
791
709
751
--
838
College St
Lexington
--
--
--
134
--
371
College St
Haywood St.
1069
1184
1022
1010
1354
777
Hilliard Ave
S. Lexington
--
--
--
291
233
451
Hilliard Ave
Coxe Ave
149
269
--
253
207
230
Hilliard Ave
S. French Broad Ave.
178
165
--
160
129
138
Coxe Ave
Banks Ave
--
--
--
273
--
367
Chestnut St
Charlotte
213
76
123
125
66
53
Chestnut St
Merrimon Ave
112
129
95
126
88
72
Chestnut St
Broadway
126
85
85
79
56
62
WT Weaver
Merrimon Ave
106
124
86
93
54
34
WT Weaver
Greenway (Rndbt)
68
59
126
67
86
123
WT Weaver
28
199
176
133
149
136
WT Weaver
Broadway
82
78
82
--
69
36
Riverside Dr
Lyman
51
22
49
2
13
6
Haywood Rd
Clingman (Rndbt)
67
60
87
84
186
--
--
26
34
26
--
28
91
63
--
385
Haywood Rd
Greenway
AM
Clingman (Rndbt)
Sat
AM
Haywood Rd
Craven
28
32
Haywood Rd
Brevard
209
315
--
313
198
329
Haywood Rd
Vermont
323
182
334
357
267
342
Patton Ave
Louisiana
50
28
47
21
--
37
Tunnel Rd
Riceville
22
25
40
--
--
49
Note: Surveys from all sites were done in the afternoon from 5:00 to 7:00, unless otherwise noted.
Key items to consider in this process can be improved • • • •
Get notice out on the week before Labor Day. Evaluate more Greenways on Saturdays. Definition of “other” needs more clarity. Consider counting scooters & hoverboards.
Acknowledgements We wish to thank all the volunteers that collected the data, their dedication was invaluable. We also wish to thank the City of Asheville and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Task Force for organizing the counts. Respectfully resubmitted by Lothar A. Dohse on November 16th, 2019.
Downtown Asheville- Biltmore Avenue Pedestrian Count Time Period: Tuesday, December 2, 2014 1:00 P.M. – Tuesday, December 9, 2014 1:00 P.M. Location: Downtown Asheville, on the west side of Biltmore Avenue, about 150 feet south of Patton Avenue.
(Image: Google Maps)
Equipment: EcoCounter Pyro Counter The Pyro Counter is able to count bicyclists, pedestrians, skateboarders, rollerbladers, or anyone who passes within approximately 16.5 feet of the equipment. However, the device is unable to differentiate between the different users and simply counts them as general users. Possible sources of error include facility-users walking side-by-side or very close to each other; this is likely to include people walking or running side-by-side, children being held by a parent or walking along side of them, or dense groups of users. It is unclear how many users are likely to have been missed due to these circumstances and there has been no effort to make up for this likely discrepancy.
Results Total Users Users/Hour Peak 24-Hour Usage Peak Day Peak 2-Hour Period Peak 2-Hour Day & Time
27,200 161.90 6,676 Saturday, December 6th 1,393 2:00 – 4:00 P.M. Saturday, December 6th
Patterns of Use The following chart illustrates the average use of the sidewalk. This includes both weekday and weekend data and has greater weekday representation.
10.00% 9.00% 8.00% 7.00% 6.00% 5.00% 4.00% 3.00% 2.00% 1.00% 0.00% 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00
Percentage of Daily Users
Average Hourly Use
The second chart illustrates the different pattern of usage between the weekday and weekend.
12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00%
Weekday
4.00%
Weekend
2.00% 0.00% 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00
Percentage of Daily Users
Weekday vs. Weekend Usage
The third chart shows users/day:
Users/Day 8000
Number of Users
7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
Notes Weather was about average for most of the week, with a high around 65 degrees and a low of 34 degrees. Significant showers occurred on Saturday, December 6th and Tuesday, December 9th.
West Asheville- Haywood Road Pedestrian Count Time Period: Friday, December 12, 2014 12:00 A.M. – Friday, December 19, 2014 12:00 A.M. Location: West Asheville, on the north sidewalk of Haywood Road (US-23 B), west of Herron Avenue, east of Vermont Avenue, just outside of West End Bakery.
(Image: Google Maps)
Equipment: EcoCounter Pyro Counter The Pyro Counter is able to count bicyclists, pedestrians, skateboarders, rollerbladers, or anyone who passes within approximately 16.5 feet of the equipment. However, the device is unable to differentiate between the different users and simply counts them as general users. Possible sources of error include facility-users walking side-by-side or very close to each other; this is likely to include people walking or running side-by-side, children being held by a parent or walking along side of them, or dense groups of users. It is unclear how many users are likely to have been missed due to these circumstances and there has been no effort to make up for this likely discrepancy.
Results Total Users Users/Hour Peak 24-Hour Usage Peak Day Peak 2-Hour Period Peak 2-Hour Day & Time
8,881 52.9 1,857 Saturday, December 13th 362 1:00 – 3:00 P.M. Saturday, December 13th
French Broad River MPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 1
Patterns of Use The following chart illustrates the average use of the sidewalk on Haywood Road. This includes both weekday and weekend data and has greater weekday representation.
12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 0.00% 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00
Percentage of Daily Users
Average Hourly Use
The second chart illustrates the different pattern of usage between the weekday and weekend.
12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00%
Weekday
4.00%
Weekend
2.00% 0.00% 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00
Percentage of Daily Users
Weekday vs. Weekend Usage
French Broad River MPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 2
The third chart shows users/day.
Users/Day 2000
Number of Users
1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 Monday
Tuesday Wednesday Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
Notes The weather was about average for this time of year. Highs were usually in the 50s with lows in the high 20s/low 30s, with a slight variation on Tuesday, December 16th with a low of 23 degrees and Wednesday, December 17th, with a high of 64 degrees. Very minor precipitation (.01 in) occurred on Tuesday, December 16th and Wednesday, December 17th.
French Broad River MPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 3
Asheville Pedestrian Count Time Period: Thursday, February 26, 2015 12:00 A.M. – Thursday, March 5, 2015 12:00 A.M. Location: Near the SW intersection of W.T. Weaver Boulevard and Broadway, just south of the marked crosswalk.
(Image: Google Maps)
Equipment: EcoCounter Pyro Counter The Pyro Counter is able to count bicyclists, pedestrians, skateboarders, rollerbladers, or anyone who passes within approximately 16.5 feet of the equipment. However, the device is unable to differentiate between the different users and simply counts them as general users. Possible sources of error include facility-users walking side-by-side or very close to each other; this is likely to include people walking or running side-by-side, children being held by a parent or walking along side of them, or dense groups of users. It is unclear how many users are likely to have been missed due to these circumstances and there has been no effort to make up for this likely discrepancy.
Results Total Users Users/Hour Peak 24-Hour Usage Peak Day Peak 2-Hour Period Peak 2-Hour Day & Time
1,353 8.1 330 Wednesday, March 4th 101 4:00 – 6:00 P.M. Sunday, March 1st
French Broad River MPO / Land of Sky RPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 1
Patterns of Use The following chart illustrates the average use of the sidewalk at the count location. This includes both weekday and weekend data and has greater weekday representation.
14.00% 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 23:00
22:00
21:00
19:00
20:00
18:00
17:00
16:00
15:00
14:00
13:00
12:00
11:00
10:00
9:00
8:00
7:00
6:00
5:00
4:00
3:00
2:00
1:00
0.00% 0:00
Percentage of Daily Users
Average Hourly Use
The second chart illustrates the different pattern of usage between the weekday and weekend.
16.00% 14.00% 12.00% 10.00% 8.00%
Weekday
6.00%
Weekend
4.00% 2.00% 0.00% 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00
Percentage of Daily Users
Weekday vs. Weekend Usage
French Broad River MPO / Land of Sky RPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 2
The third chart shows users/day.
Users/Day 350
Number of Users
300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
Notes The weather transitioned from wintry to spring during the week. Thursday was snowy and highs were in the low 40s/high 30s until Saturday. Highs then took off to the 50s and even into the 70s after Sunday. Wednesday was sunny with a high in the 70s. Significant precipitation occurred only on Thursday, February 26th.
French Broad River MPO / Land of Sky RPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 3
Asheville Pedestrian Count Time Period: Friday, March 6, 2015 12:00 A.M. – Friday, March 13, 2015 12:00 A.M. Location: Near the SE intersection of W.T. Weaver Boulevard and Merrimon Avenue, in North Asheville.
(Image: Google Maps)
Equipment: EcoCounter Pyro Counter The Pyro Counter is able to count bicyclists, pedestrians, skateboarders, rollerbladers, or anyone who passes within approximately 16.5 feet of the equipment. However, the device is unable to differentiate between the different users and simply counts them as general users. Possible sources of error include facility-users walking side-by-side or very close to each other; this is likely to include people walking or running side-by-side, children being held by a parent or walking along side of them, or dense groups of users. It is unclear how many users are likely to have been missed due to these circumstances and there has been no effort to make up for this likely discrepancy.
Results Total Users Users/Hour Peak 24-Hour Usage Peak Day Peak 2-Hour Period Peak 2-Hour Day & Time
438 2.6 123 Sunday, March 8th 50 2:00 – 4:00 P.M. Sunday, March 8th
French Broad River MPO / Land of Sky RPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 1
Patterns of Use The following chart illustrates the average use of the sidewalk at the count location. This includes both weekday and weekend data and has greater weekday representation.
16.00% 14.00% 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 23:00
22:00
21:00
20:00
19:00
17:00
18:00
16:00
15:00
14:00
13:00
12:00
11:00
10:00
9:00
8:00
7:00
6:00
5:00
4:00
3:00
2:00
1:00
0.00% 0:00
Percentage of Daily Users
Average Hourly Use
The second chart illustrates the different pattern of usage between the weekday and weekend.
Weekday vs. Weekend Usage Percentage of Daily Users
25.00% 20.00% 15.00% Weekday
10.00%
Weekend
5.00%
0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00
0.00%
French Broad River MPO / Land of Sky RPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 2
The third chart shows users/day.
Users/Day 140
Number of Users
120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
Notes The weather was the warmest it had been in a while. Highs were in the 60s from Sunday – Thursday, but a little cooler on Friday and Saturday. Significant precipitation occurred on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, March 9-11.
French Broad River MPO / Land of Sky RPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 3
West Asheville Pedestrian Count, Spring 2015 Time Period: Thursday, May 21, 2015 12:00 A.M. – Thursday, May 28, 2015 12:00 A.M. Location: West Asheville, on the north sidewalk of Haywood Road (US-23 B), west of Herron Avenue, east of Vermont Avenue, just outside of West End Bakery.
(Image: Google Maps)
Equipment: EcoCounter Pyro Counter The Pyro Counter is able to count bicyclists, pedestrians, skateboarders, rollerbladers, or anyone who passes within approximately 16.5 feet of the equipment. However, the device is unable to differentiate between the different users and simply counts them as general users. Possible sources of error include facility-users walking side-by-side or very close to each other; this is likely to include people walking or running side-by-side, children being held by a parent or walking along side of them, or dense groups of users. It is unclear how many users are likely to have been missed due to these circumstances and there has been no effort to make up for this likely discrepancy.
Results Total Users Users/Hour Peak 24-Hour Usage Peak Day Peak 2-Hour Period Peak 2-Hour Day & Time
9,407 56.0 1,909 Saturday, May 23rd 370 8:00 – 10:00 P.M. Saturday, May 23rd
French Broad River MPO / Land of Sky RPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 1
Patterns of Use The following chart illustrates the average use of the sidewalk at the count location. This includes both weekday and weekend data and has greater weekday representation.
23:00
22:00
21:00
19:00
20:00
18:00
17:00
16:00
15:00
13:00
14:00
12:00
11:00
10:00
9:00
8:00
7:00
6:00
5:00
4:00
3:00
2:00
1:00
10.00% 9.00% 8.00% 7.00% 6.00% 5.00% 4.00% 3.00% 2.00% 1.00% 0.00% 0:00
Percentage of Daily Users
Average Hourly Use
The second chart illustrates the different pattern of usage between the weekday and weekend.
10.00% 9.00% 8.00% 7.00% 6.00% 5.00% 4.00% 3.00% 2.00% 1.00% 0.00%
Weekday Weekend
0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00
Percentage of Daily Users
Weekday vs. Weekend Usage
French Broad River MPO / Land of Sky RPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 2
The third chart shows users/day.
Users/Day Number of Users
2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
French Broad River MPO / Land of Sky RPO Pedestrian Counts
Saturday
Sunday
Page 3
Asheville Pedestrian Count, Spring 2015 Time Period: Friday, May 29, 2015 9:00 A.M. – Friday, June 5, 2015 9:00 A.M. Location: Downtown Asheville, on the west side of Biltmore Avenue, about 150 feet south of Patton Avenue.
(Image: Google Maps)
Equipment: EcoCounter Pyro Counter The Pyro Counter is able to count bicyclists, pedestrians, skateboarders, rollerbladers, or anyone who passes within approximately 16.5 feet of the equipment. However, the device is unable to differentiate between the different users and simply counts them as general users. Possible sources of error include facility-users walking side-by-side or very close to each other; this is likely to include people walking or running side-by-side, children being held by a parent or walking along side of them, or dense groups of users. It is unclear how many users are likely to have been missed due to these circumstances and there has been no effort to make up for this likely discrepancy.
Results Total Users Users/Hour Peak 24-Hour Usage Peak Day Peak 2-Hour Period Peak 2-Hour Day & Time
35,474 211.2 9,450 Saturday, May 30th 1,750 8:00 – 10:00 P.M. Saturday, May 30th
French Broad River MPO / Land of Sky RPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 1
Patterns of Use The following chart illustrates the average use of the sidewalk at the count location. This includes both weekday and weekend data and has greater weekday representation.
23:00
22:00
21:00
20:00
19:00
18:00
17:00
16:00
15:00
14:00
13:00
12:00
11:00
9:00
10:00
8:00
7:00
6:00
5:00
4:00
3:00
2:00
1:00
10.00% 9.00% 8.00% 7.00% 6.00% 5.00% 4.00% 3.00% 2.00% 1.00% 0.00% 0:00
Percentage of Daily Users
Average Hourly Use
The second chart illustrates the different pattern of usage between the weekday and weekend.
12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00%
Weekday
4.00%
Weekend
2.00% 0.00% 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00
Percentage of Daily Users
Weekday vs. Weekend Usage
French Broad River MPO / Land of Sky RPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 2
The third chart shows users/day.
Users/Day 10000
Number of Users
9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday Thursday
Friday
French Broad River MPO / Land of Sky RPO Pedestrian Counts
Saturday
Sunday
Page 3
Beaucatcher Greenway Pedestrian Count Time Period: Monday, November 27, 2017 12:00 A.M. – Monday, December 4, 2017 12:00 A.M. Location: About one hundred yards from the end of White Fawn Drive on the Beaucatcher Greenway.
(Image: Google Maps)
Equipment: EcoCounter Pyro Counter The Pyro Counter is able to count bicyclists, pedestrians, skateboarders, rollerbladers, or anyone who passes within approximately 16.5 feet of the equipment. However, the device is unable to differentiate between the different users and simply counts them as general users. Possible sources of error include facility-users walking side-by-side or very close to each other; this is likely to include people walking or running side-by-side, children being held by a parent or walking along side of them, or dense groups of users. It is unclear how many users are likely to have been missed due to these circumstances and there has been no effort to make up for this likely discrepancy.
Results Total Users Users/Hour Peak 24-Hour Usage Peak Day Peak 2-Hour Period Peak 2-Hour Day & Time
264 1.6 67 Saturday, December 2nd 29 4:00 – 6:00 P.M. Friday, December 1st
French Broad River MPO / Land of Sky RPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 1
Patterns of Use The following chart illustrates the average use of the sidewalk at the count location. This includes both weekday and weekend data and has greater weekday representation.
Average Hourly Use Percentage of Daily Users
25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00%
23:00
22:00
21:00
20:00
19:00
18:00
17:00
16:00
15:00
13:00
14:00
12:00
11:00
10:00
9:00
7:00
8:00
6:00
5:00
4:00
3:00
2:00
1:00
0:00
0.00%
The second chart illustrates the different pattern of usage between the weekday and weekend.
Weekday vs. Weekend Usage Percentage of Daily Users
35.00% 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% Weekday
15.00%
Weekend
10.00% 5.00%
0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00
0.00%
French Broad River MPO / Land of Sky RPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 2
The third chart shows users/day.
Users/Day 80
Number of Users
70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
Notes
French Broad River MPO / Land of Sky RPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 3
Downtown Asheville Pedestrian Count Time Period: Monday, December 4, 2017 12:00 P.M. – Monday, December 11, 2017 12:00 P.M. Location: On the west side of Broadway Street, about 50 – 100 feet from the intersection with Walnut Street in Downtown Asheville.
(Image: Google Maps)
Equipment: EcoCounter Pyro Counter The Pyro Counter is able to count bicyclists, pedestrians, skateboarders, rollerbladers, or anyone who passes within approximately 16.5 feet of the equipment. However, the device is unable to differentiate between the different users and simply counts them as general users. Possible sources of error include facility-users walking side-by-side or very close to each other; this is likely to include people walking or running side-by-side, children being held by a parent or walking along side of them, or dense groups of users. It is unclear how many users are likely to have been missed due to these circumstances and there has been no effort to make up for this likely discrepancy.
Results Total Users Users/Hour Peak 24-Hour Usage Peak Day Peak 2-Hour Period Peak 2-Hour Day & Time
9,701 57.7 2,700 Saturday, December 9th 739 1:00 – 3:00 P.M. Saturday, December 9th
French Broad River MPO / Land of Sky RPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 1
Patterns of Use The following chart illustrates the average use of the sidewalk at the count location. This includes both weekday and weekend data and has greater weekday representation.
Average Hourly Use Percentage of Daily Users
14.00% 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00%
23:00
22:00
21:00
20:00
19:00
17:00
18:00
16:00
15:00
14:00
13:00
11:00
12:00
10:00
9:00
8:00
7:00
5:00
6:00
4:00
3:00
2:00
1:00
0:00
0.00%
The second chart illustrates the different pattern of usage between the weekday and weekend.
Weekday vs. Weekend Usage Percentage of Daily Users
16.00% 14.00% 12.00% 10.00% 8.00%
Weekday
6.00%
Weekend
4.00% 2.00%
0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00
0.00%
French Broad River MPO / Land of Sky RPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 2
The third chart shows users/day.
Users/Day 3000
Number of Users
2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Monday
Tuesday Wednesday Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
Notes Major snowstorm on Friday, December 8th through Saturday, December 9th.
French Broad River MPO / Land of Sky RPO Pedestrian Counts
Page 3
Reed Creek Greenway Automated Count Time Period: Monday, September 15, 2014 5:10 P.M. – Tuesday, September 23, 2014 5:10 P.M. Location: Reed Creek Greenway, north of Cauble Street
Equipment: EcoCounter Pyro Counter The Pyro Counter is able to count bicyclists, pedestrians, skateboarders, rollerbladers, or anyone who passes within approximately 16 feet of the equipment. However, the device is unable to differentiate between the different users and simply counts them as general users. Possible sources of error include facility-users walking side-by-side or very close to each other; this is likely to include people walking or running side-by-side, children being held by a parent or walking along side of them, or dense groups of users. It is unclear how many users are likely to have been missed due to these circumstances and there has been no effort to make up for this likely discrepancy.
DRAFT Results Total Users Users/Hour Peak 24-Hour Usage Peak Day Peak 2-Hour Period Peak 2-Hour Day & Time
2775 14.38 372 Monday, September 22 180 5:00-7:00 P.M. Thursday, September 18
Patterns of Use The following chart illustrates the average use of the Reed Creek Greenway by hour. This includes both weekday and weekend data and has greater weekday representation.
Reed Creek Greenway Hourly Averages 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
The second chart illustrates the different pattern of usage between the weekday and weekend.
Weekday vs. Weekend Usage 70 60 50 40 Weekday
30
Weekend
20 10 23:00
21:00
22:00
20:00
19:00
17:00
18:00
16:00
15:00
14:00
13:00
12:00
11:00
10:00
9:00
7:00
8:00
6:00
5:00
4:00
3:00
2:00
1:00
0:00
0
Notes Weather was generally pleasant throughout the count- no heavy rains, no excessive heat, no excessive cold.
South French Broad Avenue Automated Count Time Period: Monday, October 28, 2014 4:00 P.M. – Monday, November 4, 2014 4:00 P.M. Location: South French Broad Avenue, Asheville, NC – just north of Asheville Middle School – the counter was placed on a utility pole on the west side of the street, facing the sidewalk.
Equipment: EcoCounter Pyro Counter The Pyro Counter is able to count bicyclists, pedestrians, skateboarders, rollerbladers, or anyone who passes within approximately 16.5 feet of the equipment. However, the device is unable to differentiate between the different users and simply counts them as general users. Possible sources of error include facility-users walking side-by-side or very close to each other; this is likely to include people walking or running side-by-side, children being held by a parent or walking along side of them, or dense groups of users. It is unclear how many users are likely to have been missed due to these circumstances and there has been no effort to make up for this likely discrepancy.
DRAFT Results Total Users Users/Hour Peak 24-Hour Usage Peak Day Peak 2-Hour Period Peak 2-Hour Day & Time
992 5.90 372 Monday, November 3rd 107 5:00-7:00 P.M. Monday, November 3rd
Patterns of Use The following chart illustrates the average use of the sidewalk on South French Broad Avenue. This includes both weekday and weekend data and has greater weekday representation.
18.00% 16.00% 14.00% 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 23:00
22:00
21:00
20:00
19:00
18:00
17:00
16:00
15:00
14:00
13:00
12:00
11:00
10:00
9:00
8:00
7:00
6:00
5:00
4:00
3:00
2:00
1:00
0.00% 0:00
Percentage of Daily Users
Average Hourly Usage
The second chart illustrates the different pattern of usage between the weekday and weekend.
18.00% 16.00% 14.00% 12.00% 10.00% 8.00%
Weekday
6.00%
Weekend
4.00% 2.00% 0.00% 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00
Percentage of Daily Users
Weekday vs. Weekend Usage
Notes Weather was generally pleasant during the week, averaging a high in the 60s with a low in the 40s; very little precipitation until late on 10/31 and morning of 11/1. Saturday, 11/1 and Sunday, 11/2 had lows below 32 degrees and small amounts of snow. Pedestrian volumes likely decreased below expected activity due to the inclement weather.
CLOSE THE GAP APPENDIX 3: EXISTING PLAN DOCUMENT REVIEW
City of Asheville Close the GAP Planning Documents Review September 22, 2021 (UPDATED) As a part of the Asheville Close the GAP Project, relevant planning documents have been reviewed and summarized. The purpose of this exercise is to ensure any recommendations that are developed from this plan are consistent with precedent, and to help establish vision and goals as Close the GAP advances. The plan review was limited to sections that related to pedestrian, ADA and greenway facilities within the City. The following are findings from this review that are directly relevant to this Study process. This review is presented in three sections: City of Asheville plans, County plans, and plans developed at the regional level by the French Broad River MPO. Relevant vision statements from these planning documents are also included.
City Plans Advancing Racial Equity in Asheville (2021) Following the summer 2020 protests that swept the Country after the death of George Floyd, the City of Asheville began to address its role in systemic racism and to address these issues for the next generation. This spurred the development of the 30/60/90 Day Work Plan which has since become a sustained program called the Advancing Racial Equity in Asheville. The Plan is a set of actions with associated timeframes towards applying a social, economic and environmental justice lens to all work in service of the Asheville community. The Plan includes improved performance measures to chart outcomes in equity as well as a 2021-2022 budget that advances racial equity.
Takeaway: equity will be a central part of the GAP Plans and the tools and measures developed in this Plan can be used to benchmark and evaluate projects in the GAP Plans.
Biltmore Avenue and McDowell Street Corridor Study (2021) The Biltmore/McDowell Corridor Study set out to study the feasibility of multimodal improvements on this pair of north/south arterial streets just south of downtown. Takeaway: The recommendations from this plan, as well as the two corridor studies led by the FBRMPO (found later in this document) were incorporated into the recommended Close the GAP network.
Downtown Master Plan Update: Public Space Management (2019-2020) This project is part of the City’s work on updates to the Downtown Master Plan that will help address concerns about the management of public spaces, as well as provide tools to enhance community character and expand options for placemaking. The updates are in response to the growing users of downtown and the associated demands and priorities for the use of public spaces, most specifically streets and sidewalks. Outcomes of the Downtown Master Plan Updates will aim to help expand downtown vitality, facilitate local business and enhance livability. As of the writing of this memo, the City has conducted extensive planning through the Public Space Management Committee and through an outreach survey. The Committee met six times in 2019 to discuss the scope of the issues related to public space in downtown and to develop a survey. In October 2019, the Committee participated in a workshop to prioritize topics and agree on goals, intents and values. The following are recurring themes from the Committee meetings: ●
There is a desired vision to maintain sidewalks and ped access
There is a discussion of what this means as it relates to construction closures and covered walkways ● Discussion of sidewalk requirements for new developments ●
The Workshop Meeting identified the following as urgent issues: ● ● ● ●
Construction related closures (both identified) Larger sidewalk spaces for gathering Unobstructed sidewalk space for walking and mobility Street and sidewalk lighting
The survey was available in late summer 2019, and over 900 responses were received. The following are key topics from the survey as it relates to Close the GAP: Top issues ○ Unobstructed sidewalk space ○ Lighting ○ Larger sidewalk/plaza space for gathering ○ Construction related closures ● What makes you feel safe ○ Lighting ○ Pedestrian activity ○ Walking/biking police ○ Wider, better maintained sidewalks ○ Crosswalks ● What makes you feel less safe ○ Wide intersections ○ Broken sidewalks ○ Police ○ Poor lighting ●
Takeaway: This process is defining priorities and setting policy as it relates to a number of issues that affect pedestrians in Asheville. It will be important for GAP efforts to closely coordinate with this planning effort to ensure that both are coordinated and contribute to overall City vision.
Transit Master Plan (2018) The City of Asheville Transit Master Plan (TMP) is the guiding document for the City of Asheville’s transit system. It provides specific routing recommendations to improve service in the short-term and serves as a long-term vision plan for future expansion and improvements. The TMP presents some interesting findings that have relevance to the GAP planning efforts and convey the need for multimodal transportation solutions in the City: ● Comparing population and job densities in 2010 to the 2014 projections, job growth is anticipated to occur in downtown and along major corridors in Asheville. These areas are all currently well served by ART. ● Employment centers are trip generators, and these are used to determine how effective the existing transit service is in serving the places that people need to get to in the community. ● Of the 43,548 drivers in Asheville (2016), 1.4% use public transportation as their primary means of transportation to work, 4.5% walk and 0.6% use some other means, including bicycling. ● Asheville drivers have relatively short travel times (average of 18 minutes per trip), which may represent an ideal market for potential public transit commute trips. ● The 2009 ART Rider Survey indicates that for 68% of riders, the bus is their only transportation and 68% make less than $15,000 annually. Similar numbers are reported in the 2013 Rider Survey, which also reports that 73% of riders live in a no vehicle household. ● The TMP notes that many places lack adequate connectivity to transit due to lack of sidewalks or challenging slopes to navigate to and from the main corridors. The plan recommends park-and-ride locations and super stops near the ends of routes and at locations closer to frequent service corridors. Potential park and ride locations offer areas where enhanced pedestrian access should be a consideration. These locations include the following: ● ● ● ● ●
Grace Baptist Church on Haywood Road Inanda Baptist Church on Brevard Road Biltmore Square Mall on Brevard Road Kmart on Brevard Road Anders Rice Funeral Home on Patton Avenue
Kmart on Patton Avenue and Louisiana Avenue Ingles on Hendersonville Road Publix on Hendersonville Road Skyland Plaza on Hendersonville Road Ingles on Tunnel Road Haywood Road east of State Street Patton Avenue at Louisiana Avenue Biltmore Village – All Souls Crescent Biltmore Village – Lodge Street Hendersonville Road north of Long Shoals Hendersonville Road near Caribou Road and Rock Hill Road Walmart and Kohls on Bleachery Boulevard ● Veterans Restoration Center on Tunnel Road ● Tunnel Road west of Asheville Mall ● Merrimon Avenue at WT Weaver Boulevard ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Takeaway: The TMP presents an analysis of existing transportation and demographics in Asheville. Most promising to the GAP Study, the TMP recommends locations where park and ride or super stops should be a consideration. The Pedestrian, ADA Transition Plan and Greenway Plan should ensure that these locations are considered as the GAP Study and projects are developed.
Living Asheville (LA) (2018) VISION: Asheville is a great place to live because we care about people, we invest in our City, and we celebrate our natural and cultural heritage. Our City is for everyone. Our urban environment and locally-based economy support workers, entrepreneurs and business owners, families and tourists, and people of all ages. Cultural diversity and social and economic equity are evident in all that we do. Our neighborhoods are strong, participation in civic life is widespread and collaborative partnerships are the foundation of our success.
Living Asheville, the City’s Comprehensive Plan, is a lengthy document that summarizes aspirational goals for the Asheville future. The plan is presented in four books: introduction, six themes, physical strategies and land use, and implementation. Each book in some way, touches on Asheville’s greenway and pedestrian network. Introduction / Key Aspirations The introduction leads to LA’s twelve Key Aspirations. While greenways, pedestrians and accessibility overlap with many of the Key Aspirations, the most relevant to Close the GAP include: Strengthen Urban Transit Corridors and Transit-Supportive Centers: This should include creating safe, attractive and well-connected places for all people that include environmentally friendly infrastructure, employ universal design concepts, and which allow for transportation choices beyond the car. Create an Integrated Green Infrastructure System and Transportation Network: In order to foster connectivity, reduce traffic congestion, mitigate the urban heat island effect and increase resilience in the face of climate change, the City should work to better integrate its network of complete streets, greenways, protected bike lanes and sidewalks with community parks, gathering places, neighborhoods, jobs, shopping areas and other activity centers. Connect Our Urban Centers: As urban nodal development in the City continues to coalesce, the City should work to better connect these growth centers to each other. Transit service should be improved connecting people to destinations. The City should study the feasibility of a Citywide bikeshare program and work toward integrating the greenway network with community places. Foster Resilient Neighborhoods: Neighborhoods are the soul of Asheville and should be included in all placemaking efforts. Other neighborhood strategies could include working with African American and other minority communities to enable better outcomes for their communities.
Grow a Thriving Urban Environment: The City should balance investment in transportation, public space, recreational amenities, social infrastructure and pedestrian infrastructure across neighborhoods. The City should also consider design guidelines for development adjacent to greenways and policies for greenway connectivity to increase the benefits and impact of greenway corridors. Themes The six themed chapters - Livable Built Environment, Resilient Economy, Harmony with the Natural Environment, Healthy Community, Interwoven Equity, and Responsible Regionalism - contain a wide variety of references to greenways in the form overview text, goals, outcomes, or strategies. While many, if not all, of the goals have relation to bicycle and pedestrian issues, the references that are most relevant to Close the GAP include: Relevant Livable Built Environment Goals ● Goal 5: Make Streets More Walkable, Comfortable and Connected: “...Sidewalks, marked crosswalks, lighting and street trees in Asheville should contribute to the pedestrian experience but should be contextually appropriate based on adjacent streets and land uses. The City should also continue to expand upon the greenways program, promoting the role of greenway corridors as an auxiliary facet of the multimodal network, connecting communities with destinations.” ● Goal 6: Increased Access to Safe Bicycling. “…An integrated network of appropriate facilities is needed to meet multiple and evolving needs.” ● Goal 9: Improve the Multimodal Transportation System: “...Asheville needs to move away from auto-centric planning and find a better balance on our streets to meet the needs of all users.” ● Goal 11: Build Out the Greenway Network: Greenway corridors provide connectivity and, when possible, an off-road experience to enjoy nature. Asheville has less than six miles of completed greenways but the Greenways Master Plan identifies approximately 60 miles of greenway corridors. Annually, public polls show that greenways are one of the most desired public facilities. The City should continue to expand upon the Greenways Program, promoting the role of greenways as an integral facet of the multimodal network connecting communities with destinations, such as job centers. Greenways should be well-designed, integrated with communities and be hospitable to a range of recreational activities. Harmony with the Natural Environment
● Goal 21: Promote Access to Well-Maintained Parks and Open Space for All: “...As the city urbanizes and as resources allow, Asheville should also work to develop new city parks of all types and greenways, with emphasis on neighborhood connectivity and equitable distribution of park and open space assets across the city.” A Healthy Community ● Goal 29: Enhance the Safety of the Public Realm Interwoven Equity ● Goal 32: Improve Community Involvement in Decision Making ● Goal 33: Prioritize Investments Equitably and Fairly Across Neighborhoods ● Goal 35: Increase Access to Opportunities for All Responsible Regionalism: ● Goal 36: Enhance Transportation To and From Asheville ● Goal 39: Enhance and Celebrate Asheville’s Unique Places and Destinations Physical Strategies and Land Use The Physical Strategies and Land Use book outlines growth strategies based on the preferred growth scenario developed during LA development. The book presents growth guidelines based on the community’s preference for growth. The guidelines in turn were used to identify growth areas across the City. Transit-Supportive Corridors are one type of growth area identified in LA. Additionally, LA identifies areas suitable for Town Centers. LA also includes multimodal transportation recommendations that will lead to a development pattern that aligns with the City’s preferred growth scenario. Recommendations relevant to GAP include: ● Develop equitable policies and secure funds to acquire needed property and easements to expand the existing Asheville and Buncombe County greenway programs. ● Work to eliminate gaps in the Citywide sidewalk network, especially where sidewalks tie in to greenways, in identified growth areas and in underserved communities.
These, and other strategies form the City’s Future Land Use Map that will guide land use policy and actions in the coming years. Town Center (red), Urban Corridors (pink), Urban Centers (dark blue), and Parks/Open Space (green), along with a small amount of land for Traditional Neighborhood Development (light pink) are the future land uses found along the SRG Corridor. Takeaway: The Living Asheville (LA) Plan is both visionary and specific. It establishes core goals and values for Asheville and provides specific strategies to achieve these goals. Many of these strategies relate to Close the GAP and should be closely coordinated.
Asheville in Motion (AIM) Mobility Plan (2016) – Street Measures VISION: The vision for Asheville is a clear, effective and connected transportation system that is lasting and offers enhanced choices. City Staff developed this matrix to document recommended street dimensions in a variety of contexts based on findings from the AIM Plan. The dimensions are provided for street types (workhorse streets, City connectors, neighborhood connectors, locals and freeways/expressways) and their corresponding street settings (residential, traditional neighborhood, downtown, suburban centers and corridors, regional centers and corridors, manufacturing/aerospace/logistics, craft industry, campus, parks and open space). Multiple modes are considered for each street type and setting, including the pedestrian realm (frontage, sidewalk, furniture/landscape), bicycle realm (facility type), curbside realm (curb zone, parking area), and vehicle realm (travel lane, median). Takeaway: This resource is important as the City considers implementation of facilities in the pedestrian master plan and as it works with developers to upgrade the transportation system. In addition, as the City considers updates to the Downtown Master Plan considering the Public Space Management effort, these standards need to be documented to ensure that downtown street standards are consistent across the City.
The Burton Street Neighborhood Plan (2018) The Burton Street Neighborhood Plan was developed by NCDOT, in partnership with the Burton Street Community Association, to address potential impacts resulting from the I-26
Connector project and current community concerns, enhance the quality of life of the Burton Street community and to preserve the strong sense of community among Burton Street residents. The Plan outlines several key goals and strategies, including the following related to pedestrian/greenway needs and opportunities. These are prioritized in the Implementation Plan: ● Make Streets More Walkable and Comfortable ○ Strategy: Improve existing sidewalks to meet ADA design standards ● Increase Neighborhood Connectivity ○ Strategy: Improve pedestrian connections between community resources by installing a sidewalk on Downing Street per agreement of property owners ○ Strategy: Improve sidewalk connections between commercial corridors, and include a pedestrian path from Buffalo Street to Patton Avenue that will connect to future greenway ● Improve Access to Transit ○ Strategy: Evaluate opportunities for new transit stops, such as near Burton Street and Haywood Road ○ Strategy: Install a sidewalk along Patton Avenue to connect pedestrian path and transit stop ● Improve Access to Parks and Greenspace ○ Strategy: Conduct a feasibility study to consider a future Smith Mill Creek greenway through the Burton Street neighborhood ● Increase Pedestrian Safety ○ Strategy: Implement traffic calming measures on Burton Street and Florida Avenue including improved speed bumps, and consistent speed limits throughout the neighborhood To address and remedy the anticipated impacts to the Burton Street Community as a result of the I-26 improvements, there are several mitigation strategies that will be implemented by NCDOT. Those relating to pedestrians include: ● Improve Existing Sidewalks to Meet ADA Design Standards ● Improve Pedestrian Connections Between Community Resources by Installing a Sidewalk on Downing Street per Agreement of Property Owners ● Improve Sidewalk Connections Between Commercial Corridors and Include a Pedestrian Path from Buffalo Street to Patton Avenue That will Connect to Future Greenway
● Install a Sidewalk along Patton Avenue to Connect Pedestrian Path and Transit Stop Takeaway: This Plan offers key recommendations for pedestrian and greenway connectivity at the neighborhood scale in a community that has experienced decades of inequities. These specific recommendations can form the basis of network improvements to connect the Burton Street neighborhood with the City.
Asheville Neighborhood Sidewalk Policy (2015) In 2015, the City developed this policy for construction of sidewalks from the Neighborhood Sidewalk capital program. This outlines requirements for consideration, prioritization of projects, initial and secondary screening, and public involvement. The criteria applies to streets that are identified in the Pedestrian Master Plan. Much like the Pedestrian Master Plan, the criteria include the following (initial screening): ● ● ● ●
Proximity to transit and community destinations Zoning Demographics Safety
Secondary screening factors include: ● ● ● ●
Connectivity Presence/absence of sidewalk on one side of the street Construction feasibility Geographic distribution
The initial public involvement plan consists of seeking input at the Neighborhood Advisory Committee via face-to-face input and a short survey. Additional outreach is planned via the City’s Neighborhood Coordinator and the community group, Just Economics, distributed the survey with their efforts. Future public involvement includes outreach with the Neighborhood Sidewalk Committee, which includes members from the Multimodal Transportation Commission and the Neighborhood Advisory Committee. Takeaway: Developed in 2015, the Sidewalk Program Policy is linked to the 2005 Pedestrian Master Plan. With a forthcoming update to this Master Plan, it presents an opportunity to also update this resource to ensure that projects are effectively prioritized,
planned, constructed, and evaluated, and that performance measures are relevant and being met.
River Arts District Transportation Improvement Project (RADTIP) The River Arts District Transportation Improvement Project (RADTIP) is a major roadway and greenway construction project along the east side of the French Broad River in Asheville’s River Arts District. The 2.2-mile improvement includes a continuous multi-use path along the river. It will also incorporate drainage systems for stormwater, wide sidewalks, bike lanes and additional parking. Intersections will be improved for better traffic flow. Takeaway: As a part of RADTIP, part of the City’s Greenway Master Plan is being implemented, allowing a greenway network to be achieved.
Downtown Master Plan (2009) Asheville’s 2009 Downtown Master Plan focuses on seven primary strategies that fall within three groupings: experiencing, shaping and managing downtown. The strategy that has the most relation to GAP is the following: provide good, interconnected transportation choices for better access and better health. Of the Areas of Concern, transportation is identified with a need for better access to downtown by multi-modes. The Plan conveys that walkability must be enhanced throughout downtown at blank or vacant storefronts, along parking lots, near heavy traffic and in areas with steep topography. Pedestrian friendly streets, storefronts and pedestrian scale buildings are themes that are intertwined throughout the Plan. Transportation choice is conveyed in the Plan, with a network of priority pedestrian streets and a bicycle network being identified. The Plan recommends extending greenways such as the Reed Creek and Clingman closer to downtown, as well as the implementation of
bikeways/greenways along Broadway to UNCA, Patton and Clingman to the River Arts District, and along Asheland/Biltmore to Mission, A-B Tech and Biltmore Village. Takeaway: The Downtown Master Plan leans on the Greenway Master Plan and Bike Plan as implementation tools to achieve a more multimodal downtown. As these planning documents are updated through GAP, coordination with the update to the Downtown Master Plan should be considered.
Comprehensive Bicycle Plan (2008) The Asheville Bike Plan was developed to identify continuous linear bicycle connections and facilities for a range of users, thereby increasing safety and mobility for people on bikes in the City. In total, it recommends 43 miles of bike lanes, 17 miles of climbing lanes, 21 miles of shared lane markings, 64 miles of shared roadways and 36 miles of striped shoulder. Recommendations are grouped into short-, medium- and long-term categories, and encouragement/education/enforcement programs are also addressed. Takeaway: While the Asheville in Motion (AIM) Mobility Plan is now the primary source for the bicycle network in the City, it is important that this resource be documented as the greenway and pedestrian network is developed to ensure consistency with this planning precedent.
Pedestrian Plan (2005) VISION: Asheville will develop and maintain a pedestrian network that includes sidewalks, pedestrian crossings and greenways that offer convenience, safety and connectivity to citizens and visitors, encourage and reward the choice to walk and use transit, improve access for those with disabilities, and add to the quality of life and unique character of the City of Asheville. The City of Asheville Pedestrian Plan (2005) provides a detailed context overview, identifies needs, outlines the vision, goals and objectives, and provides recommendations.
The Plan reviews the multiple tasks, costs and considerations involved in installing sidewalks or greenways. It provides background information on City responsibilities and management approaches, including determination of need, requirements and priorities, engineering and design, right-of-way acquisition, construction, and maintenance. The Plan also describes the sidewalk inventory and condition survey which had been collected in 1999 and 2004. One recommendation from these efforts was to update the condition survey every 2 years. This baseline information is the basis of the infrastructure recommendations. Based on this condition survey, at the time of the study, there were almost 27 million dollars in identified sidewalk construction needs within the City. This includes new sidewalks, ADA compliance needs and identified maintenance/upgrade needs. The City saw about 20 miles of sidewalk built since the prior sidewalk inventory in 1999 by new development and City efforts. Continuing at that rate would take the City of Asheville over 30 years to complete the sidewalk needs identified in this plan, without addressing future maintenance needs not yet identified. In addition to these sidewalk gaps, the Plan outlines pedestrian signal needs, crossing improvements, ADA compliance needs and greenway needs. These were compiled based on community input and City staff knowledge. Given that there are many more needs than resources available, the plan identifies prioritization criteria for sidewalks, based on the following: Zoning jurisdiction; 1. Proximity to Schools, Parks, and Community Centers; 2. Proximity to Transit Stops; 3. Needed linkages that complete a pedestrian thoroughfare or address a safety concern; 4. Feasibility of construction; and 5. Major Thoroughfares and Connector Roads. The Plan identifies 5 goals, 26 objectives and dozens of tasks to allow the City to arrive at its vision for pedestrians in the City. For the immediate two years following the Plan creation, there are 15 performance measures to keep the City on track towards meeting these goals. Beyond infrastructure, the key recommendations of the Plan are as follows:
● Maintenance of the sidewalk inventory data; ● Revisions to the UDO and Standards and Specifications Manual; ● Update the fee-in-lieu price structure once the new City sidewalk crew has completed a year of work; ● Establish other local funding sources; ● Work through the MPO and NCDOT Division office to establish a policy for managing sidewalk requests in ETJ areas; ● Incorporate walking into the City’s new Transportation Demand Management Program; ● Improve staffing and management of greenway and sidewalk projects and grants; and ● Establish design policies for NCDOT projects within the City limits. Takeaway: While 15 years old, the 2005 Pedestrian Plan is an infrastructure-heavy master plan that offers a good baseline from which to measure progress. It sets forth a prioritization model, as well as goals/objectives/tasks and recommendations, which the City can use as a basis to either build the current Pedestrian Program or revisit and revise based on initial limitations. For instance, the Plan established a performance measure of building 4 miles of new sidewalk between 2005-2007. The City may want to revisit such a task as a part of the current Pedestrian Plan to evaluate its effectiveness.
ADA Transition Plan (1992) This is largely a facilities transition plan, as well as a transition plan for the transit system. There is brief mention of ADA in the public right-of-way: “The City of Asheville, through its Director of Public Works, has begun incorporating the ADA standard handicap ramp design in the streets and sidewalk bond projects, the cities normal maintenance rehabilitation contracts, and the in-house work which the Street Division of Public Works is doing throughout the City. See attached timeframe for completion of corrective work. Community input channeled through the ADA Coordinator will assist in the timely development of all sidewalks incorporating the ADA handicap ramp design. The attached timeframe for completion was not available at the time of this review”.
Pg. 105 describes accessibility for public hearings, and the Plan later describes accessibility in City programs and services offered to those with disabilities. Takeaway: The City’s Transition Plan offers a framework for the City’s response to the new ADA law in relation to facilities, transit, community engagement and programming, but there is very little mention of public right-of-way in this document.
City Plans: Greenways Greenway Connector Project (2019) The City developed a plan to connect Town Branch Greenway to McCormick Field. From there, one could connect into the Beaucatcher Greenway. The Connector project identified on-street designs that could include pedestrian/bicycle connectivity and safety, as well as wayfinding opportunities. Takeaway: With this project, the City’s Greenway Master Plan is being implemented, allowing a greenway network to be achieved.
Swannanoa River Greenway Corridor and Feasibility Study (2019) VISION: The Swannanoa River Greenway will be a critical east-west active transportation corridor that provides a diverse community a place to connect to thriving spaces to work, shop, and play. It fulfills the vision of the Wilma Dykeman RiverWay Master Plan by stimulating economic investment and preserving open space to honor the river. A greenway study from Biltmore Avenue to Azalea Park was completed in-tandem with the beginning of NCDOT’s transportation redesign for the Swannanoa River Road Corridor. This study was broken into two segments (eastern and western), divided by the existing segment of the Swannanoa Greenway near Walmart. Further details of these two sections are: The Western Section. The western section study includes several options that are still in consideration:
● Converting Thompson Street into a one-way street and incorporating a greenway. ● Redesigning Swannanoa River Road into a complete street, with a greenway as part of the planned NCDOT project. ● Both options converge near Glendale Avenue and run along the south side of the river to the existing greenway at Walmart. The Eastern Section. This study area runs from the existing Walmart greenway to Azalea Park. The preferred alignment supported by the public and the City would follow Swannanoa River Road and be built as part of NCDOT’s road redesign. A bridge would be necessary to cross the Swannanoa River near the WNC Nature Center. The study also identified an opportunity for a trail running through the River Ridge apartments, which the landowners at the time indicated they were amenable to. Takeaway: This Feasibility Study advanced a concept from the 2013 Master Plan to further design that could be implemented as partnership and funding opportunities arise.
Greenway Master Plan (2013) This update identified new corridors, revised the previous corridors, and updated a definition of corridor type. It also updated a map showing the County Master Plan (which was completed that year) and how it interfaces with the City greenway plan. This Plan also identified greenways that should be included as part of the I-26 Corridor Study. Takeaway: This Plan was an update from the 2009 Master Plan, and offered additional definition of greenway corridors, prioritization, and coordinated with the County.
Parks, Recreation, Cultural Arts and Greenway Master Plan (2009) VISION: The City of Asheville’s parks and greenways system is an interconnected system of parks and greenways. Goals include: provide a diversity of parks and greenways, ensure all parks and greenways meet the City’s high standards for level of service, create a system of interconnected local and regional parks and greenways, including trails, paths,
and walks, and preserve and celebrate unique cultural, historical, and natural features within the City of Asheville throughout the system. Highlights from the plan include: ● The following are the most important to add, expand or improve (all rating above 70% “very important”): future unpaved/natural trails, open space/natural areas, more trail connections, playgrounds, paved recreational paths and community gardens ● The most important concerns for the City of Asheville to address through the Master Plan Update as indicated by respondents include more greenway trails (40% of respondents), better pedestrian/bike access (31%) and awareness of programs (25%). This desire for greenways is reinforced by the financial choices respondents made when asked how they would allocate $100 to City services (parks, trails, greenways, and open space ranked number two behind law enforcement) and $100 to parks, recreation, cultural arts and greenways (greenways rated as the top priority) The plan shortened the list of greenways by identifying 17 proposed priority greenway corridors. A variety of greenway recommendations in this plan, include: ● Improve wayfinding and signage to and between existing parks, greenways, and indoor facilities for pedestrian and bike navigation. ● Develop design standards for new and existing parks and greenways (this strategy includes a variety of action steps related to design standards). ● Create smaller seating areas along greenways, particularly at the water’s edge. ● Strive to provide parks, greenways, or indoor facilities within one third mile of all City residents to increase walkability. Takeaway: This Plan documents the long-standing support for greenways in the City, and it offers some key recommendations that should be considered in the Greenway Master Plan update as a part of Close the GAP.
Wilma Dykeman Riverway Master Plan (WDRMP) (2003) VISION: The Wilma Dykeman Riverway Master Plan (WDRMP) envisioned the revitalization of the surrounding lands of the French
Broad and Swannanoa Rivers within the City of Asheville. Revitalization was proposed through the development of open green space, greenways, and urban revitalization along the corridor. The goal of the plan is to make the riverfront, “so inviting and exciting and uniquely Asheville that you will want to BE THERE.” The BE THERE acronym represents the seven elements of the plan: Balance (B), Economic Development (E), Transportation (T), Health (H), Environment (E), Recreation (R), Education (E). As part of this Plan, a “parkway” concept was developed that envisions Riverside Drive, Meadow Road, and Swannanoa River Road as a parkway intended for vehicles and multimodal facilities, including a greenway. This greenway would allow pedestrians and bicyclists to interface with the river on a 12-14 foot path. Cross sections were developed to show the character of the Riverways proposed greenway and parkway. Takeaway: Much of the vision of this Plan was implemented in the River Arts Districts, but the Swannanoa River corridor is still in the planning and revitalization phase. The WDRMP remains the guiding vision for the Swannanoa River Corridor and there is opportunity to partner with NCDOT’s slated Swannanoa River Road redesign to implement the WDRMP vision as part of a multimodal corridor that can be a catalyst for redevelopment, provide opportunity for environmental/riparian improvements, and host opportunities for placemaking and recreation.
County Plans Buncombe County Trails Master Plan (2012) VISION: To support and promote the development of an environmentally friendly system of connected trails and greenways to improve health, alternative travel, economic development, and recreation in coordination with towns, cities, communities, businesses, non-profit organizations and adjacent counties. This Master Plan looked at connecting the entire county through a series of corridors that mostly followed waterways. The Plan identifies corridors that have assigned types/typologies. These corridors weave through incorporated and unincorporated areas of the county. There are priority corridors identified as well as unpaved walking paths, long-term planned greenways, and other greenway corridors. The
Plan also identified NCDOT complete streets routes, or areas where a multi-use path paralleling a state-owned road could occur. The Plan identifies City of Asheville corridors that mirror the City’s Greenway Master Plan. The priority corridors within the City include: ● The Wilma Dykeman RiverWay Corridor: Which is now termed in the City as the French Broad Greenway and the Swannanoa River Greenway. ● The Swannanoa River Greenway: Starting just east of Azalea Park and traveling east into the county and eventually Black Mountain. ● The French Broad Greenway: Traveling from Broadway/the Asheville municipal boundary north into Woodfin. This section is now called the Woodfin Greenway and Blueway. ● The Hominy Creek Greenway: Two connections stem from Hominy Creek and Highway 191. Much of this planned corridor is still within the City. ● The Lake Julian Greenway: The greenway is planned to connect to Biltmore Park/Lake Julian, most of which is within the City. Part of this network also proposes a greenway along Sweeten Creek Road. Takeaway: The County’s Greenway Master Plan was closely coordinated with Asheville’s greenway network, and this coordination should continue to occur as the networks develop.
Woodfin Blueway & Greenway / Highway 251 Greenway Study and Engineering (2018-2020) The Town of Woodfin, Buncombe County and nonprofits are partnering to implement a greenway/blueway system along the French Broad within Woodfin. The greenway would be an extension of the French Broad Greenway, which ends at the City of Asheville’s municipal boundary at Broadway. In 2020, Buncombe County is initiating preliminary engineering and construction documents and hopes to build the greenway within a few years. The study addresses how the greenway will terminate at the Broadway intersection. This intersection and junction will likely be addressed as part of NCDOT’s I-26/Riverside Drive project.
Takeaway: This greenway connection is an important junction point for both the City of Asheville’s planned French Broad and Reed Creek Greenways and represents important coordination efforts between the City and County to ensure that a network is achieved.
Bent Creek Greenway Feasibility Study (Brevard Road/191 Corridor) (2016) Led by Buncombe County, this study looked at the connectivity of Hominy Creek Greenway to both, the WNC Farmers Market and the Asheville Outlet Mall. Much of the proposed corridor is within the City of Asheville, as it runs along Highway 191/Brevard Road. The preferred alignment chosen by the county runs along the west side of Highway 191/Brevard Road and would require a signalized crossing on Brevard Road to connect into the Asheville Outlets. The greenway continues south and was studied as part of the Lake Julian Greenway Corridor Study. The connection to the WNC Farmers Market is proposed on the west side of Hominy Creek, utilizing a historic and decommissioned bridge owned by the City to cross the creek near the Hominy Creek Greenway trailhead. The preferred alignment was never officially adopted by the City and there was some disagreement between stakeholders on the preferred alignment. Takeaway: As much of the preferred alignment is within the City, this planning effort should be closely coordinated with the City.
Bent Creek-Lake Julian Feasibility Study (2015) The study looks at connecting the Asheville Outlet Mall to Lake Julian, following I-26 and the French Broad River. The greenway would cross over Long Shoals Road where it would parallel the road to Biltmore Park. The preferred alternative closely matches the route shown on Asheville's Greenway Master Plan, but some slight changes were made near the Asheville Mall. Takeaway: This greenway alignment was closely coordinated with Asheville’s greenway network, and this coordination should continue to occur as the networks develop.
NC 251 / Riverside Drive Greenway Feasibility Study Buncombe County led this study, with input from City staff, who were on the steering committee. This study looked at the connection from Hillside Street to Broadway, all within the City limits. It looked at comparing routes that were parallel “on-street” facilities vs. a route that ran along the river. The study selected two routes as being the preferred, one which is on the road and the other along the river. In an update to this effort, the City is pursuing a more detailed study of what they are now calling the “North RADTIP,” which will advise the City on the final alignment. Consensus has been reached that a greenway along the road may be best from Pearson Bridge Road running north to Broadway. South of Pearson Bridge Road, the alignment will be determined based on the future North RADTIP study. Takeaway: This section is often referred to as the “missing mile” as it would connect the planned Woodfin Greenway to the constructed French Broad Greenway in the River Arts District and is critical to greenway network connections.
Regional, NCDOT, & French Broad River Metropolitan Planning Organization Plans Hendersonville Road and Tunnel Road Corridor Studies (2021) In 2020, the FBRMPO set out to study two key corridors in the Asheville urban area: Hendersonville Road and Tunnel Road. The purpose of these studies was to develop strategies to improve multimodal options and provide better connectivity. Takeaway: the recommendations from both corridor studies were incorporated into the Close the GAP network planning.
I-26 Connector Project (Asheville Area) I-26 Project (I-26/I-40 Interchange to Hendersonville) The I-26 Connector Project runs through the heart of Asheville. Advocates and the City have continuously engaged NCDOT to ensure the accommodations of bicycle and pedestrian facilities in the project. In 2018, the City contracted to have a firm independent of NCDOT analyze the design and make recommendations. Known as the Sam Schwartz Study, the Study provided future land use/redevelopment and pedestrian and bicycle facility improvements related to the I-26 Connector project. Through input from the Greenway Committee and City staff, the consultant proposed pedestrian/bicycle facility improvements (most of which came from City plans like the Greenway Master Plan), which was proposed back to NCDOT for inclusion into final plans. The City then formed an Aesthetics Committee that worked with NCDOT to integrate suggested pedestrian/bicycle facilities (much of which mirrored the Sam Schwartz Study). Many of these facilities were incorporated into early 30% Design Plans for the I-26 Connector Project. The City continues to work through the Aesthetics Committee to finalize agreements with NCDOT on what pedestrian/bicycle facilities will make it into final design and construction. The I-26 Project extends from the I-26 interchange with I-40 into Hendersonville. There are no new greenway facilities accommodated as part of this project. The proposed Hominy Creek Greenway and Bent Creek Greenway cross through this project, but there is no facility redesign in the areas where the greenways would interface with the interstate. Takeaway: The redesign and widening of Interstate I-26 has been many years in the making and through intensive City staff and public input, will likely achieve some gains for pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
I-26 Asheville Connector Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) (2020) A Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) assesses the physical, biological and social/human impacts of a proposed project
and all reasonable alternatives, including an alternative where the project is not built, and proposes mitigation. In this FEIS developed by NCDOT, the existing conditions are described and the alternatives assessed for environmental impacts, compatibility with local planning goals, cost-effectiveness and public sentiment. Takeaway: A number of pedestrian, bicycle and greenway recommendations are being advanced through this project, including sidewalk, crossing, and ADA improvements within and connecting to the Burton Street neighborhood, connectivity to Carrier Park, and upgrades to existing greenways. These projects will be incorporated into the GAP planning efforts as they move forward.
The Hellbender Regional Trail System The Hellbender Regional Trail System concept originated from the French Broad Metropolitan Planning Organization and has been supported by many partners. The Swannanoa and French Broad River Greenways are the core to a regional system that includes the counties surrounding Buncombe County. This greenway system would be the spine or major “highway route” for pedestrian/bike connectivity within the region. Takeaway: The City’s French Broad and Swannanoa River Greenways are the heart of this regionally proposed system, which offer regional greenway connectivity.
The Fonta Flora State Trail The Fonta Flora Trail originated from Burke County as a trail that would circumnavigate Lake James. However, the idea evolved into a regional trail system that would connect Morganton to Asheville via a hundred-mile trail. Black Mountain, Marion, and others are actively working on connecting their portions of this plan. In 2015, the trail was designated as a North Carolina State Trail, giving it a higher level of attention. The trail already has several miles of officially designated sections and branding has been developed for it. In 2018, Asheville City council officially approved that the planned Swannanoa Greenway would be part of the Fonta Flora State Trail.
Takeaway: Another regional greenway corridor, the Fonta Flora State Trail offers connectivity from Asheville to Morganton and is important to regional pedestrian and bicycle access.
Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) for French Broad River MPO and Rural Areas of Buncombe and Haywood Counties (2008) The Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) is the region’s multimodal transportation plan that seeks to identify needed improvements. The CTP represents a community’s consensus on the future transportation system (including the existing system and improvements) needed to support anticipated growth and development over a 25-30-year timeframe. When a CTP is adopted by NCDOT, it represents the state’s concurrence with the identified transportation needs and proposed recommendations. There are many projects identified in the CTP that are within the City limits and have important implications to pedestrian and bicycle access. Takeaway: While over a decade old, the recommendations in the CTP provide some roadway and multimodal solutions that are relevant to this Study. The roadway improvements should be coordinated closely with any trail recommendations as they offer an avenue for partnership and implementation with NCDOT and the MPO.
French Broad River MPO 2040 MTP The French Broad River Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) looks 25 years into the future. It forecasts changes in the region and seeks to identify transportation improvements needed to keep travelers and goods moving smoothly and how to pay for those improvements. It is a fiscally constrained document, meaning the anticipated revenues must cover the anticipated costs. The following are bicycle or pedestrian projects in the City of Asheville from the MTP: ● New Leicester Highway Sidewalks ● Clingman Forest and Town Branch Greenways
● ● ● ● ● ● ●
French Broad River West Greenway Asheville Greenway Connectors Riceville Road Sidewalks Bent Creek Greenway Phase I and Phase II McDowell St and Choctaw St Pedestrian Improvements McDowell St and All Souls Crescent Bicycle Improvements Broadway Street Road Diet
Takeaway: Projects must be in the MTP to receive state and federal transportation funding in the North Carolina Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), so this document is critical to ensure future funding opportunities and should be coordinated with closely, especially as the MPO is updating this document in 2020.
French Broad River MPO Transportation Improvement Projects Projects within the TIP, and Highway Safety Improvement Project (HSIP) will be reviewed as a part of the mapping documentation of the Close the GAP Project.
Blue Ridge Bike Plan (2013) VISION: The Vision for the Blue Ridge Bike Plan is to help create a community in Western North Carolina where bicycling can serve to improve the physical and mental health of the community; and where people have transportation choices, stronger economic development, safer bicycling opportunities for live-work-play connections, a complete street transportation system, and less dependence on foreign oil. In 2013, the Blue Ridge Bike Plan was developed, having been awarded funding from the NCDOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Division. The purpose of the Blue Ridge Bike Plan is to identify and define improvements to both create and enhance a regional bicycle route system in seven counties of Western North Carolina. A key goal of the Plan is to provide bicycle mobility and connections in the region.
The Blue Ridge Bike Plan identifies several Regional Priority Corridors for bicycle improvements, which connects various communities and key destinations. The following are Buncombe County corridors that traverse through Asheville: ● ● ● ●
Swannanoa River Road to Tunnel Road Sand Hill Road to US 19/23 US 74A to Blue Ridge Parkway Sweeten Creek Road to Hendersonville Road
The following are Asheville proper priority corridors: ● ● ● ● ●
Lyman Street to Biltmore Avenue Charlotte Street to Edwin Place Patton Avenue to Hazel Mill Road Haywood Rod to Patton Avenue College Street to Beaucatcher Tunnel
The highest priority recommendation from public input and the steering committee was the following: “Develop, implement and maintain a core network of safe and well-connected bicycle facilities (bike lanes and greenways).” Takeaway: While regional in focus, the Blue Ridge Bike Plan supports extensive bicycle network development within and to Asheville that connect local destinations and communities.
NCDOT Complete Streets Implementation Guide (2020) The purpose of this guide is to provide a resource to NCDOT staff in the implementation of the agency’s Complete Streets policy. There are eight primary sections of the Guide that outline the agency’s approach to integrating Complete Streets in projects: 1. Planning. A community’s Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) is considered the controlling plan for the identification of non-motorized facilities to be evaluated as part of a roadway project. Other locally adopted plans will be considered so long as 1) the planned facility address s a transportation need and 2) the planned facility
meets the design guidance standards referenced in Section 7. Each proposed roadway project will include the preparation of a Complete Streets Project Sheet (example can be found in the Guide). The Project Sheet will identify planned multimodal facilities and document any exceptions considered in the course of project development. Certain projects may have a Project Sheet that was developed as a part of the CTP process. Exceptions to Complete Streets implementation may be requested and considered any time throughout the process through the Complete Streets Program Administrator in the Integrated Mobility Division. A multi-disciplinary Complete Streets Review Team will review all requests for exceptions to the Complete Streets Policy. 2. Project Development. The Guide outlines three primary phases of project development. a. Project Scoping: The Integrated Mobility Division will participate in scoping meetings and provide a written summary memo identifying facility recommendations and design guidance as appropriate. b. Bridge Projects: The Project Engineer will coordinate with the Integrated Mobility Division through scoping requests to incorporate Complete Streets elements in bridge designs for each bridge replacement project undertaken by NCDOT. The Guide describes conditions where pedestrian, bicycle or multi use path needs should be accommodated in bridge projects. c. Equal or Better Performance of a Facility: Conditions often change between the time a project is added to the Strategic Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP) and the when the project development process begins, that may support the incorporation of a different type of bicycle or pedestrian improvement than shown in an adopted plan. NCDOT will review an alternative facility to the bicycle and/or pedestrian facility type proposed in the adopted plan upon the written request of the local representatives to the Project Engineer. 3. Resurfacing and Maintenance Activities. a. Resurfacing. Each year, a county-level resurfacing schedule is developed within each NCDOT Division. NCDOT Division staff will meet with local agencies to review the scheduled roadways and identify locations to evaluate Complete Streets improvements. The Guide offers a process to be followed in reviewing these projects for complete streets improvements.
b. Rumble Strips/Stripes. Rumble strips/stripes will not be extended across the shoulder of the roadway or other areas intended for bicycle travel. The Mobility & Safety Division in coordination with the Integrated Mobility Division will evaluate situations on a case by case basis where rumble strips/stripes recommended for safety may conflict with bicycle travel. 4. Work Zone Accommodations. The continuity of existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities will be maintained during construction and maintenance activities. During the construction phase of a roadway project, NCDOT’s Guidelines for the Level of Pedestrian Accommodation in Work Zones will be followed. 5. Related Policies. This section outlines policies that are superseded by the Complete Streets Implementation Guide, and those NCDOT policies that include Complete Streets elements. 6. Cost Share. Bicycle, pedestrian and public transportation facilities that appear in an adopted Plan directly or by reference will be fully funded, not including elements identified as betterments (more below). The following table illustrates the funding responsibilities for complete streets facilities.
Projects that are not identified in an adopted plan may be included in a project, but these require the local jurisdiction to share the incremental cost of construction based on the population thresholds below.
A roadway project betterment is defined as: ● A requested bicycle, pedestrian or public transportation improvement that exceeds the recommendations appearing in an adopted plan and/or exceeds the needs identified through the project development process; or ● Aesthetic materials and treatments, if this cost is determined to exceed the cost of standard construction materials; or ● Landscaping in excess of standard treatments as defined by NCDOT Roadside Aesthetics Policy; or ● Lighting in excess of standard treatments as defined by NCDOT lighting policy. The additional costs associated with inclusion of these elements in a roadway project are the responsibility of the local jurisdiction, executed through a local agreement. Local and County maintenance is also addressed in this Guide. 7. Design Guidance. This section includes the design guidance for Complete Streets design, including the NCDOT Roadway Design Manual, AASHTO guides, NACTO guides and FHWA supplemental guidance. 8. Administration. This section outlines the process to review and maintain the Guide.
In Closing: The City of Asheville and other partners have a wide variety of planning documents to guide pedestrian, ADA and greenway related decisions. Through the Close the GAP planning process, the City is presented with a prime opportunity to integrate the ideas and policies from previous studies into this project; the City also has the opportunity to bring forth new ideas and update concepts and policy documents.
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
CLOSE THE GAP APPENDIX 4: COMMITTEE AND ENGAGEMENT TRACKING
Close the GAP Committee and Engagement Tracking Sheet Last Updated September 2022
● ● ● ● ●
Think Tank Team Meeting #1 Project introduction and initial information gathering Attendees: Think Tank Team members December 18, 2019 9:30-11:00am Public Works Conf Room 109 161 S Charlotte St
● ● ● ● ●
Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting #1 Project introduction and initial information gathering Attendees: CAC members January 23, 2020 3:00-4:30pm Lenoir Rhyne University
● ● ● ● ●
Citizens Advisory Committee Drop In Meeting Project introduction and initial information gathering Attendees: Blue Ridge Parkway Foundation, NCDOT, AARP January 27, 2020 12:00-2:00pm Pack Memorial Library
● ●
Asheville Unpaved Alliance Kick-off Meeting Kick-off to being an alliance of organizations and individuals to support the Asheville Unpaved Initiative Attendees: Asheville Unpaved Alliance Members and Consultant Team February 10, 2020 12:00 - 1:00pm The Rhu, 10 S Lexington Ave, Asheville, NC 28801
● ● ●
● ● ●
City of Asheville Transportation SWOT Meeting Discussion of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats related to pedestrian, greenway and ADA issues in the City Attendees: City Transportation Staff and Consultant Team. For Attendees see this document.
Appendix 4: Community Engagement Summary 1of 8
● ●
● ● ● ● ●
● ● ● ● ●
● ● ● ● ●
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wu4VDYz06Sy2aL20qkCBKfpQXnQItqauC7H1x 1BOOug/edit March 4, 2020 2:00-4:00pm City Hall
Asheville Unpaved Alliance Meeting The group brought forward ideas of potential locations for trails, what kind of trails the group would want to see, and potential roles of the members. Attendees: Task Force Members and Consultant Team April 28, 2020 Google Meet
City/County Greenway Discussion Project updates and best practices Attendees: City and County Staff, Consultant Team, County Greenway Staff (Peyton O’Conner, Karla Furnari) June 3, 2020 11:45am-1:15pm Google Meet
City of Asheville Public Works SWOT Meeting Discussion of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats related to pedestrian, greenway and ADA issues in the City Attendees: City Staff and Consultant Team July 14, 2020 10:00am-12:00pm Google Meet
● ●
City of Asheville NCDOT SWOT Meeting Discussion of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats related to pedestrian, greenway and ADA issues in the City Attendees: NCDOT, City Staff and Consultant Team For attendees see video https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LVUqrbEFEH_jr0uVCyQC8l0hJ2lMmQ9G/view?usp=sh aring July 16, 2020 2:00-3:30pm Google Meet
●
City of Asheville ADA Admin Meeting
● ● ●
Appendix 4: Community Engagement Summary 2of 8
●
● ● ●
● ● ● ● ●
● ●
● ● ●
● ● ● ● ●
● ● ● ●
Discussion of project goals and objectives with a focus on ADA Transition Plan funding needs to set the stage of funding decisions that will need to be made during the project recommendations phase. Attendees: Eric Edgerton, Barbara Whitehorn, Cathy Ball, Brad Stein, Lucy Crown, Barb Mee, Kristy Carter, Christy Staudt, Melissa Anderson, Brad Branham, Jessica Morriss July 17, 2020 Google Meet
City of Asheville Planning and DSD SWOT Meeting Discussion of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats related to pedestrian, greenway and ADA issues in the City Attendees: City Staff from Planning and Development Services Departments and Consultant Team. July 17, 2020 3:00-5:00pm Google Meet
Asheville Unpaved Alliance - Meeting with Blue Ridge Southern Railroad Met with Blue Ridge Southern Railroad to discuss potential greenway alignments that would utilize the railroad’s right-of-way. The railroad company was tentatively open to future discussion. Attendees: WATCO, City Staff and Consultant Team July 21, 2020 11:00-11:30am Zoom
City of Asheville Capital Projects SWOT Meeting Discussion of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats related to pedestrian, greenway and ADA issues in the City Attendees: Consultant Team and Capital Project Managers and Staff (Including Parks) July 27, 2020 2:00-4:00pm Google Meet
Asheville Unpaved Alliance Meeting Asheville Unpaved Alliance met to review potential “trail hub” locations and discuss the potential role of the alliance. Attendees: Asheville Unpaved Alliance August 12, 2020, 12:00-1:30pm
Appendix 4: Community Engagement Summary 3of 8
●
Zoom
● ● ●
Asheville Unpaved Alliance Meeting Meeting with Bill Botten (US Access Board) to discuss ADA and Natural Surface Trails The City of Asheville and the consultant team met with one of the nation’s foremost experts on ADA accessibility as it relates to requirements for pathways and trails. September 28, 2020, 10:00-11:00am Microsoft Teams
● ●
● ● ●
Asheville Unpaved Alliance Meeting Alliance met in person to develop an action plan for next steps to implement pilot projects. Attendees: Asheville Unpaved Alliance October 7, 2020, 6:30-8:00pm Carrier Park Pavilion
● ● ● ●
GAP and ADA TP Surveys Collect information about current and desired state of walking and rolling in Asheville October 30, 2020 - January 18, 2021 PublicInput
● ●
AVL Unpaved Alliance: in March 2021, the committee began meeting weekly to advance project ideas outside of the Close the GAP project. These are not captured in this plan document.
● ● ●
TTT Meeting #2 Project status update with Destination and Equity Evaluation, Review of How Projects Will be Developed and Results of First Public Survey Attendees: Think Tank Team Members March 18, 2021 12:30-2:00pm Google Meet
●
CAC Meeting #2
● ●
Appendix 4: Community Engagement Summary 4of 8
● ● ●
Project status update with Destination and Equity Evaluation, Review of How Projects Will be Developed and Results of First Public Survey Attendees: CAC members March 23, 2021 2:00-2:30pm Google Meet
● ● ● ● ●
Friday Brown Bag Lunch with City Staff Project status update, intermediate network plan to review Attendees: COA Planning, COA Transportation and Consulting Team June 11, 2021 12:00 - 1:30pm Google Meet
● ● ●
Friday Brown Bag Lunch with City Staff Overview of GAP prioritization methodology and network draft Attendees: COA Planning, COA Transportation, COA Capital Projects and Consulting Team July 19, 2021 12:00 - 1:00pm Google Meet
●
● ●
● ● ● ●
Intercept Survey To meet people where they are walking and wheeling and ask them about their trip to help inform an understanding of economic impacts of greenways. August 10, 2021 (7:00am-7:00pm) and August 14, 2021 (7:00am (Reed Creek) 8:00am (RAD)-3:00pm) Wilma Dykeman Greenway/River Arts District and Reed Creek Greenway/Botanical Gardens
● ● ● ● ●
Friday Brown Bag Lunch with City Staff Review of public meeting materials Attendees: COA Planning, COA Transportation and Consulting Team August 13, 2021 12:00 - 1:30pm Google Meet
● ●
Presentation to Multimodal Transportation Commission (MMTC) To share an update on the project and gather feedback on the pedestrian and greenway networks
Appendix 4: Community Engagement Summary 5of 8
● ● ●
Attendees: MMTC members, COA Transportation staff and Consulting Team August 25, 2021 (3:00-5:00pm) Google Meet
● ●
Public Meeting #1 To share an update on the project and gather feedback on the pedestrian and greenway networks August 25, 2021 (6:00-7:30pm) August 27, 2021 (10:00-11:30am) Google Meet
● ● ●
● ● ● ● ● ●
ADA Focus Group Meeting #2 To share an update on the project and gather feedback on the ADA Transition Plan priority corridors. Attendees: ADA Focus Group Members September 14, 2021 (6:00-7:30pm) September 16, 2021 (10:00-11:30am) Google Meet
●
Individual Meetings to Obtain Input on Plan Recommendations ○ City Transportation Staff - December 13, 2021 ○ Various City Departments - December 14, 2021 ○ NCDOT - January 20, 2022 Google Meet
● ● ● ● ●
Presentation to Greenway Committee Presentation of Findings Attendees: Committee members, COA Transportation staff and Consulting Team February 3, 2022 (3:00-5:00pm) Google Meet
● ● ● ●
Presentation to Multimodal Transportation Commission (MMTC) Presentation of Findings Attendees: MMTC members, COA Transportation staff and Consulting Team February 23, 2022 (3:00-5:00pm)
●
Appendix 4: Community Engagement Summary 6of 8
●
Google Meet
● ● ● ● ●
TTT Meeting #3 Presentation on Final Findings Attendees: Think Tank Team Members March 22, 2022 3:00-4:30pm Google Meet
● ● ● ● ●
CAC Meeting #3 Presentation on Final Findings Attendees: CAC members March 28, 2022 3:00-4:30pm Google Meet
● ● ● ● ●
ADA Focus Group Meeting #3 To share an update on the project findings and ADA Transition Plan priority polices and findings. Attendees: ADA Focus Group Members March 31, 2022 (3:00-4:30pm) Google Meet
● ● ● ●
Final Community Survey To gather feedback on the pedestrian and greenway networks February 21 - March 31, 2022 PublicInput.com
● ● ● ●
Draft Plan for Community Input To gather feedback on the Draft Close the GAP Plan April 2022 City of Asheville Website
● ●
City Budget Meetings and ADA Discussions May - August 2022 Attendees: Various city departments such as Transportation, Capital, Administration, Budget
Appendix 4: Community Engagement Summary 7of 8
● ●
To discuss ADA Transition Plan implementation and funding needs. Google Meet
Appendix 4: Community Engagement Summary 8of 8
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
CLOSE THE GAP APPENDIX 5: GREENWAY INTERCEPT SURVEY
GAP Intercept Survey Summary *River Arts District (RAD), Reed Creek Greenway (RCG)
Trail Activity Removed blanks RAD Bike Run Skate (roller, board) Walk RCG Bike Run Skate (roller, board) Walk Grand Total
299 62 71 7 159 176 24 53 1 98 475
21% 24% 2% 53% 14% 30% 1% 56%
How Travel to Trail Removed blanks, added fill in values RAD Bicycle Bus Car Walk/Run Roll/Skate RCG Bicycle Bus Car Walk/Run Grand Total
318 27 1 223 64 3 189 27 1 54 107 507
8% 0% 70% 20% 1% 14% 1% 29% 57%
Primary Purpose Removed blanks RAD Commuting Dining, Shopping, Errands Exercise, Fitness, Socializing Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment RCG Commuting Dining, Shopping, Errands
337 3 9 274 51 220 10 22
1% 3% 81% 15% 5% 10%
Grand Total
557
Secondary Purpose Removed blanks RAD Commuting Dining, Shopping, Errands Exercise, Fitness, Socializing Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment RCG Commuting Dining, Shopping, Errands Exercise, Fitness, Socializing Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Grand Total
154 4 20 35 95 36 2 15 18 11 190
3% 13% 23% 62% 6% 42% 50% 31%
Active Minutes Removed blanks and values that had too much variability (“30-60 minutes”) or were unclear (“no idea” or “5 miles”) RAD 316 <15 minutes 7 2% 16-30 minutes 40 13% 31-45 minutes 49 16% 46-60 minutes 83 26% 61-75 14 4% 76-90 39 12% 91-120 35 11% >120 49 16% RCG 222 <15 2 1% 16-30 31 14% 31-45 47 21% 46-60 68 31% 61-75 8 4% 76-90 19 9% 91-120 32 14% >120 15 7% Grand Total 538
How Often Use Trail Removed blanks RAD 2-3 times a month A few times per year
314 46 14
15% 4%
Everyday Few times a week First visit Once per month RCG 2-3 times a month A few times per year Everyday Few times a week First visit Once per month Grand Total
52 138 56 8 201 20 3 51 111 13 3 515
17% 44% 18% 3% 10% 1% 25% 55% 6% 1%
Primary Activity Removed blanks; when multiple responses provided (fill), used first mentioned mode RAD 331 Bicycling 71 21% Running 70 21% Skating 7 2% Walking/Rolling 178 54% Other (frisbee, one wheel, yoga, kayaking, scooter) 5 2% RCG 199 Bicycling 30 15% Running 44 22% Walking/Rolling 124 62% Other (frisbee, one wheel, yoga, kayaking, scooter) 1 1% Grand Total 530
Spending Habits Removed responses that were indicated with “?” or responses such as “don’t know yet”. If it was a range (“$5-10”) I used the average ($7.50). On their trip to the RAD, users spent an average of $72.49 on expenses during their trip. ● 33 people (15% of those interviewed) spent an average of $24.30 on restaurant meals and drink expenses ● 6 people (2% of those interviewed) spent an average of $92.14 on groceries/convenience items ● 7 people (2% of those interviewed) spent an average of $143.00 on retail expenses ● 1 person (<1% of those interviewed) spent $10 on entertainment (at the skate park) ● 3 people (<1% of those interviewed) spent an average of $93 at “other” establishments (Odyssey ClayWorks, Pisgah Fitness, kayak rental) On their trip to the RCG, users spent an average of $53.81 on expenses during their trip.
● ● ● ● ●
9 people (5% of those interviewed) spent an average of $13.44 on restaurant meals and drink expenses 15 people (9% of those interviewed) spent an average of $48.13 on groceries/convenience items (many went to the North Asheville Tailgate Market) 2 people (<1% of those interviewed) spent an average of $23.50 on retail expenses 1 person (<1% of those interviewed) spent $160 on bicycle-related expenses (Flying Bike Tour & Rentals) 4 people (<1% of those interviewed) spent an average of $24 at “other” establishments (garage sales, gas)
Living Status – Permanent, Seasonal, Visitor Removed blanks RAD Permanent Resident Seasonal Resident Visitor RCG Permanent Resident Seasonal Resident Visitor Grand Total
323 246 12 65 210 184 9 17 533
76% 4% 20% 88% 4% 8%
Living Status – Permanent, Local Removed blanks RAD Arden Asheville Biltmore Forest Brevard Buncombe Co Burnsville Candler Fairview Hendersonville Jupiter Leicester Mars Hill Swannanoa Waynesville Weaverville Woodfin RCG Alexander Asheville Buncombe Co
241 1 186 1 1 1 2 11 5 1 1 7 1 2 1 10 10 182 1 162 1
0% 77% 0% 0% 0% 1% 5% 2% 0% 0% 3% 0% 1% 0% 4% 4% 1% 89% 1%
Candler Fairview Swannanoa Weaverville Woodfin Grand Total
2 5 1 8 2 423
1% 3% 1% 4% 1%
Living Status – State Removed blanks or unknown. Originally, I did not include all of the detail of the state travelling from but decided to keep in case this could make a fun graphic. RAD 309 CA 5 2% CO 1 0% CT 2 1% DC 1 0% FL 8 3% GA 4 1% IL 3 1% MD 4 1% MN 1 0% MO 1 0% NC 257 83% NY 6 2% NJ 1 0% OH 1 0% OR 1 0% PA 1 0% SC 3 1% TN 1 0% TX 3 1% VA 4 1% WV 1 0% RCG 198 CA 1 1% CO 1 1% FL 5 3% KY 1 1% MA 2 1% MN 1 1% MO 1 1% NC 182 92% NY 2 1% VA 1 1% WA 1 1%
Grand Total
507
Visit Nights Removed blanks, unknown data RAD 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 >7 RCG 1 3 5 6 7 >7 Grand Total
34 2 2 7 12 2 2 2 5 10 1 1 1 1 1 5 44
6% 6% 21% 35% 6% 6% 6% 15% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 50%
Visit: Trail Importance Removed blanks RAD Not Important Somewhat Important Very Important RCG Not Important Very Important Grand Total
64 26 19 19 17 10 7 540
Visit: Money Spent (Total Trip, Not Just to the Trail) Removed blanks, unknown RAD <100 100-200 201-500 501-1000 1001-2000 2001-3000 3001-5000 RCG
53 6 5 19 11 7 2 3 16
11% 9% 36% 21% 13% 4% 6%
<100 100-200 201-500 501-1000 1001-2000 2001-3000 3001-5000 5000-6000 Grand Total
1 2 2 2 2 5 1 1 69
6% 13% 13% 13% 13% 31% 6% 6%
Visit: Stay Removed blanks RAD AirBnB / Short Term Rental Campground Motel / Hotel Other W / Friend, Relative RCG AirBnB / Short Term Rental Motel / Hotel Other W / Friend, Relative Grand Total
55 23 4 17 3 8 16 6 1 2 7 71
42% 7% 31% 5% 15% 38% 6% 13% 44%
Number in Group Removed blanks RAD 1 2 3 >4 RCG 1 2 3 >4 Grand Total
55 164 116 19 21 16 132 58 14 4 71
You – Age Removed blanks, unknowns Median age of the person travelling in the RAD was 46 years old (NOTE: excel only allows median to be calculated for 255 values so I used an online calculator for this value). Median age of the person travelling in RCG was 53 years old.
RAD 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80-84 RCG Under 5 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80-84 85 and older Grand Total
288 1 0 1 7 20 30 37 36 25 32 22 29 28 15 3 2 205 5 2 5 9 15 17 23 12 20 15 24 18 25 11 3 1 493
Companion Removed blanks 12% of travelers on the RAD had at least one companion with them. 7% of travelers on the RCG had at least one companion with them.
Companion – Age Removed blanks, unknowns. Median age of a child travelling with an adult in the RAD was 6 years old. Median age of a child travelling with an adult on the RCG was 6.5 years old.
You – Gender RAD Female Male Non-Binary RCG Female Male Grand Total
322 149 172 1 210 114 96 532
46% 53% <1% 54% 46%
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
2. How Travel to Trail (Choice) Bicycle Walk
How Travel to 3. Trail Activity Trail Other (Choice) (Fill) Bike Walk
Trail Activity Other (Fill)
Barnard Ave RC3
5. Off for Destination (Fill) Catawba Steet RC17
RC6
RC12
Wedge
RC6
Chatham Rd
Exercise, Fitness
RC17
Chestnut St
Chestnut St Home
RC3 RC18
Chestnut St 377 Merrimon Ave
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Station # (Choice)
1. Start Trip (Fill)
1 2
RCG RCG
55 Maney 501 Merrimon Ave
3
RCG
Chatham Rd
4 5
RCG RCG
RC17 RC1
6
RCG
Montview
7 8
RCG RCG
RC6 5 Points West
Walk Walk
Walk Walk
9
RCG
Cumberland Cir
Walk
Walk
10
RCG
11
RCG
226 Merrimon Ave
12
RCG
RC3
Exercise, Fitness
13
RCG
Flint St
Exercise, Fitness
14 15 16 17 18 19
RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG
Federal Credit Union parking lot (SECU?) 2 Howland Woodrow Ave Elizabeth St Starnes 1086 Hendersonville Rd
Bicycle Walk Bicycle Walk Bus
20
RCG
B7?
21
RCG
22
Walk
4. Get On Trail (Fill)
Walk
6. Destination (Fill) Coffee Shope RC17
7. Exit Trail (Fill)
8. End Trip (Fill)
Trip Miles (Calculate)
9. Primary Primary Purpose Purpose (Choice) Other (Fill) Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
#
Catawba Street 55 Maney RC3 501 Merrimon Ave
Primary Purpose Other2 (Fill) Dinin
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Walk Walk
RC6 RC14
Campus CVS
RC13
RC3
RC3
RC3
300 Barnard Ave 5 Points West
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Dinin
Cumberland Cir
Exercise, Fitness
Dinin
Exercise, Fitness Walk
Walk
RC16
?
R16
Exercise, Fitness
Bike Walk Walk Walk Walk
RC7 RC2 Magnolia R17 RC17 RC3
Car
Bike
RC10
Reynolds Mtn
Bicycle
Bike
RCG
Founder Dr Apt
Bicycle
Walk
RC9
23 24 25 26 27 28
RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG
Bontanical Parking Charlotte and Max St Home and Lookout Rd W Chestnut St Weaver Park
Walk Car Walk Walk Car
Walk Walk Walk Walk Run
Botanical Parking RC7 RC9 RC16
29
RCG
Five Points
Car
Run
Chestnut
Merrimon
Chestnut
Five Points
Exercise, Fitness
30
RCG
Montford
Walk
Run
RC16
RC3
RC16
Montford
Exercise, Fitness
31
RCG
Beaver Dam
Car
Walk
RC9
RC7
UNCA
RC9
Beaver Dam
Exercise, Fitness
32 33
RCG RCG
Montford RAD
Walk Bicycle
Walk Bike
RC14 WD23
RC7
Montford Tail Gate Market
RC3 WD23
Montford WD23
Exercise, Fitness Dining, Shopping, Errands
34
RCG
26 Huntington
Walk
Run
RC3
R18
35
RCG
Pearson and Rosewood
Walk
RC13
RC7
Walk Bicycle Walk
Bike
Walk
102 Montford Ave Tailgate Market RC7 Botanical Gardens RC9
RC12 RC2 Woodrow R17 RC17
226 Merrimon Ave
al Credit Union (SECU?) 2 Howland Woodrow Elizabeth St Starnes 1086 Hendersonville Rd
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Dining, Shopping, Errands Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
Dinin
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Bike
RC9
RC9
Founders Dr Apts
RC17 Botanical parkingBotanical parking RC17 RC7 harlotte and Max St ome and Lookout Rd RC6 RC6 Farmers Market RC17 W Chestnut St
RC7
Exercise, Fitness
Exercise, Fitness Sightse Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitnessel to/from Dinineeing/Art/Entera Exercise, Fitness
R18
p back to Huntington
Exercise, Fitnessmuting to/from ping/running err
RC13
arson and Rosewood
Exercise, Fitness
Dinin
36
RCG
37
RCG
38
Botanical Gardens Botanical Gardens
RC8
Exercise, Fitness
Dinin
Car
Walk
RC8
Fulton St
Walk
Walk
R15
RC2
Grove Park Inn
RC15
RC15
Exercise, Fitness
RCG
Carlton Pl
Car
Walk
R17
RC3
RC17
RC17
Carclton Pl
Exercise, Fitness
39
RCG
Cumberland Ave
Walk
Run
RC14
RC7
Tailgate Market
RC14
Cumberland Ave
Dining, Shopping, Errands
40
RCG
Salem Ave
Walk
Walk
RC6
High Five Coffee High Five Coffee
RC18
RC6
Commuting
Em
RCG
In-town/Patton Ave
Walk
Run
RC2
RC3
RC17
Patton Apts
Exercise, Fitness
42 43
RCG RCG
Pioneer Building Larchmont Rd
Bicycle
Bike
RC17 RC3
RC7
RC17
Pioneer Bldg
Exercise, Fitness
44
RCG
Grove Park
Walk
Run
RC1
RC12
Grove Park
Exercise, Fitness
45
RCG
Downtown
Walk
Walk
RC17
Merrimon
RC17
Downtown
Exercise, Fitness
46
RCG
Oakley
Car
Walk
RC16
RC3
Tailgate Market
RC16
Oakley
Exercise, Fitness
47 48 49 50 51 52
RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG
Home (N Asheville) Pack Square Home (N Asheville) Home Home (Weaverville)
Car Bicycle Bicycle Car Walk Car
Run Bike Bike Walk Walk Walk
RC17 RC3 RC5 RC6 RC1
RC3 RC17 RC7 RC7 RC7
Tailgate Market
RC3 RC6 RC1
Pack Square Home (N Asheville) Pack Square Home (N Asheville) Home Home (Weaverville)
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Dining, Shopping, Errands Dining, Shopping, Errands Dining, Shopping, Errands
53
RCG
N Downtown
Walk
Walk
RC18
Tailgate Market
RC18
N Downtown
Exercise, Fitness
Dinin
54
RCG
RC2
Car
Walk
RC2
RC10
RC17
Weaver Park
55 56
RCG RCG
45 Pearson Pack Square
Walk Car
Walk Run
RC16 ?
RC7 RC17
Tailgate Market
RC16
45 Pearson
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Dinin
57
RCG
Grove Park neighborhood
Walk
Run
RC1
Carrier Park
RC1
58 59 60 61
RCG RCG RCG RCG
Lakeshore Montford and Watauga N Aville, W Street Merrimon
Walk Walk Bicycle Walk
Run Run Bike Walk
RC12 RC13 RC14 RC3
RC7 RC7 RC7
Tailgate Market Tailgate Market Tailgate Market
RC3 RC13 RC14 RC3
62
RCG
Downtown hotel
Walk
Walk
RC18
RC7
63
RCG
Candler
Car
Run
RC13
64
RCG
Swannanoa
Car
Run
RC13
65 66
RCG RCG
Oakley YMCA
Car Walk
Run Run
67
RCG
Bent Creek
Car
Run
68
RCG
WT Weaver Park
69
RCG
28804
Car
70
RCG
N. Aville
71
RCG
72
RCG
Run
Tailgate Market
Pack Square Tailgate Market
ve Park neighborhood Lakeshore ontford and Watauga W Street ?
RC18 Luella's
Dinin Sightse Sightse
Sightse
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Dining, Shopping, Errands Dining, Shopping, Errands Dining, Shopping, Errands Exercise, Fitness
RC13
Candler
Exercise, Fitness
RC3
RC14
Swanannoa
Exercise, Fitness
RC12 WD11
RC1
RC12 RC2
Oakley YMCA
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
RC18
RC1
RC18
YMCA
Exercise, Fitness
RC6
RC17
RC6
WT Weaver Park
Exercise, Fitness
Run
RC18
RC1
RC18
28804
Exercise, Fitness
Car
Run
RC2
RC17
RC2
N. Aville
Exercise, Fitness
W Aville
Bicycle
Bike
WD3
RC7
Tailgate Market
don't know
W Aville
Dining, Shopping, Errands
Westover St
Walk
Walk
RC13
RC7
Tailgate Market
RC13
Westover St
Dining, Shopping, Errands
Dunkin Donuts
Dinin
Dinin
73 74
RCG RCG
Northwood Rd Montford
Bicycle Walk
Bike Walk
RC12 RC14
RC3 RC7
Tailgate Market
RC3 RC14
Northwood Rd Montford
Exercise, Fitness Dining, Shopping, Errands
75
RCG
Grocery store
Car
Run
RC17
RC9
RC12
RC17
Grocery store
Dining, Shopping, Errands
76 77 78 79 80 81
RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG
Hillside St Edwin Pl Magnolia Ave Flint St Downtown Montford
Walk Bicycle Walk Walk Walk Walk
Walk Bike Walk Walk Walk Walk
RC14 WD17 Carrier Park RC16 RC16 RC17 RC14
RC3 RC3 RC7 RC9 RC7
RC14 Hillside St RC3 Edwin Pl Tailgate Market RC16 Magnolia Ave RC16 Flint St Merrimon or Elizabe Downtown Tailgate Market RC14 Montford
82
RCG
Spears Ave
Bicycle
Bike
RC3
RC11
RC11
83
RCG
W Aville
Bicycle
Bike
RC14
84
RCG
Magnolia Ave
Walk
Walk
RC16
85 86
RCG RCG
Woodrow Pl Griffen Blvd (?)
Walk Walk
Run Run
RC12
87
RCG
Fudruckers
Car
88 89
RCG RCG
Botanical Gardens Montford
Walk Bicycle
90
RCG
Northview St
91
RCG
92
Spears Ave
RC14 RC7
Tailgate Market
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Dining, Shopping, Errands Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness socializing Dining, Shopping, Erraeing/art/entertainment Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Fun
RC16
Magnolia Ave
Dining, Shopping, Errands
RC12
Woodrow Pl
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
RC12
Fuddruckers
Dining, Shopping, Errands
Botanical Gardens Montford
Exercise, Fitness Dining, Shopping, Errands
Dinin
RC12
RC9
Tailgate Market
Run Bike
? RC17
? RC9
Tailgate Market
Walk
Walk
RC17
RC3
?
Walk
Walk
RC10
RC7
aybe Tailgate Mark
RC10
RAD
Candler
Car
Run
WD2
WD9
Shopping/errands
WD23
93
RAD
Southside
Bicycle
Walk
WD6
WD2
WD6
Southside
Exercise, Fitness
94
RAD
W Aville
Walk
Walk
WD22
WD9
WD22
W Aville
Exercise, Fitness
95
RAD
W Aville near Carrier
Car
Run
WD3
WD10
s loop crossing rive
WD3
W Aville near Carrier
Exercise, Fitness
96 97
RAD RAD
Greenleaf Dr, Beaver Lake Downtown, Pack Place
Walk
WD6 WD4
WD22 ?
New Belgium
Walk
WD6 WD6
Greenleaf Dr Downtown
98
RAD
Downtown near RAD
Car
Bike
WD6
WD1 then WD9
WD6
Home
Exercise, Fitness
99
RAD
28801
Car
Walk
WD2
WD9
WD2
28801
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
100
RAD
28806
Walk
Run
WD22
WD8
WD22
28806
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
101
RAD
28804
Car
Bike
WD6
WD21
WD6
28804
Exercise, Fitness
Dinin
102
RAD
28803
WD21
28803
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
103
RAD
Blue Ridge Pkwy (camping)
Car
Walk
WD6
?
WD6
not sure
104
RAD
W Aville (home)
Car
Walk
WD2
WD8
WD2
W Aville (home)
Exercise, Fitness
105
RAD
Downtown Starbucks
Walk
Walk
WD5
WD6
WD5
not sure
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
Rolling
RC7
Wedge
WD1
nas Gerard Studio
orthview St (home) Botanical Gardens
Exercise, Fitness Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Dinin
Exercise, Fitness
Walk dog
Sightseeing, Art, Enterta Beer Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
meeting friends
106
RAD
W Aville (home)
Car
Walk
WD2
WD8
WD2
W Aville (home)
Exercise, Fitness
107
RAD
Short St
Bicycle
Bike
WD22
WD21
WD6
Short St
Exercise, Fitness
108
RAD
Leicester, past Mt Carmel
Car
Bike
WD8
?
109
RAD
Airport
Car
Walk
WD6
WD1
110
RAD
28806
Car
Walk
WD8
WD9(?)
111
RAD
28806
Car
Walk
WD6
WD9 (bridge)
WD6
112
RAD
W Aville
Car
Bike
WD2
WD9
113 114 115
RAD RAD RAD
W Aville Downtown (home) Downtown
Car Car Car
Walk Walk Walk
WD6 WD22 WD6
? WD6 WD10
116
RAD
Pfifer St
Walk
Walk
WD6
117
RAD
Kenilworth
Walk
118
RAD
Kenilworth
Walk
119
RAD
Montford
120
RAD
121
Ridge share
RAD Skate Park
WD8
ester, past Mt Carmel
? Just exploring Airbnb Asheville
Fun
Sightse
Sightse
Exercise, Fitness Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
28806
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
WD2
W Aville
Exercise, Fitness
WD6 WD22 WD6
Atlanta Downtown (home) Downtown
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
WD3
WD6
Pfifer St
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
WD6
WD5
WD8
Kenilworth
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
Walk
WD6
WD5
WD8
Kenilworth
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
Car
Walk
WD6
WD8
WD6
Montford
W Aville
Car
Bike
WD3
WD21
WD3
W Aville
RAD
Downtown/Aston
Bicycle
Bike
Downtown College
AB Tech
122
RAD
28801 (home)
Car
Walk
WD3
WD9
123
RAD
Green Mtn, NC
Car
Bike
WD10
WD1
124
RAD
W Aville
Car
Walk
WD3
125
RAD
Oakley
Car
Walk
126
RAD
Lake Lure
Car
Run
127
RAD
Leicester, past Mt Carmel
Car
Walk
128 129 130 131 132 133 134
RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD
Hotel Hotel Home Home Hotel Montford (home) 21 Skyview Pl
Car Car Car Car Car Bicycle Car
135
RAD
Montford (home)
Car
skating/skateboa
Summit Coffee
WD10
WD8
Sightse Dinin
Exercise, Fitness outdoor time recreation
Downtown
Exercise, Fitness
WD3
28801 (home)
Exercise, Fitness
WD10
Green Mtn, NC
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
WD8
WD3
W Aville
Exercise, Fitness
WD8
WD1
WD8
Oakley
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
W8
W1
Summit Coffee
W8
?
Exercise, Fitness
Dinin
WD3
WD9
Summit Coffee
WD3
Leicester
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
Run Run Run Bike Walk Run Run
WD2 WD2 WD5 WD1 WD8 WD10 WD22
WD9 (?) WD9 Carrier Park
Hotel Hotel Home
WD5 WD5 WD21
WD2 WD2 WD5 WD10 WD8 WD5 WD22
Montford (home) WD5
Run
WD2
WD9
WD2
Montford (home)
rolling/skateboar
White Duck
Carrier Park Hominy Ck
socializing
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Dining, Shopping, Erraercise and fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Sightse Sightse Sightse Sightse Sightse
136
RAD
Clingman (home)
Walk
Walk
WD6
137
RAD
Home
Car
Bike
WD21
138
RAD
W Aville (Haywood Rd)
Car
Run
WD6
139
RAD
Crest Mtn (home)
Car
Walk
140 141
RAD RAD
W Aville (home) Home (28806)
Walk Car
142
RAD
W Aville, off Louisiana
143 144
RAD RAD
145
WD6
Clingman (home)
Exercise, Fitness
WD21
Home
Exercise, Fitness
WD9
WD6
East Aville (work)
Exercise, Fitness
WD6
WD9
WD6
Crest Mtn (home)
Exercise, Fitness
Walk Run
WD9 WD5
W Aville Ingles WD9
WD5 WD5
W Aville (home)
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Dinin
Car
Walk
WD5
WD9
WD5
Aville, off Louisiana
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
Home (28806) Home (28805)
Car Car
Walk Walk
WD6 WD5
WD8 WD9
WD6 WD5
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Sightse Sightse
RAD
North - Riverside Dr (home)
Car
Walk
Summit parking lo
WD5
146 147 148
RAD RAD RAD
Hotel Mills Gap Rd (home) Hotel
Car Car Car
Run Walk Walk
WD6 WD9 WD4 (7?)
? WD5 WD9
WD6 WD9 WD4 (7?)
149
RAD
Home (near VA in Haw Creek)
Bicycle
Bike
WD6
WD9
WD6
150
RAD
Home/HFE
Walk
Walk
WD5
N/A
WD13
Home
Exercise, Fitness
151
RAD
Home (E Aville)
Car
Walk
WD6
WD8
WD6
Home (E Aville)
Exercise, Fitness
152
RAD
Leicester
Car
Walk
WD6
?
WD6
Leicester
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
153
RAD
Off Leicester HWY
Car
Walk
WD3
WD8
WD3
Exercise, Fitness Get baby out
Sightse
154
RAD
Home (Montford)
Car
Walk
WD2
Maybe past Pleb?
WD2
Home (Montford)
Exercise, Fitness
155 156 157
RAD RAD RAD
Pisgah Natl Forest Tunnel Rd - Hampton Home (E Aville)
Car Car Car
Run Walk Run
WD? WD3 WD
Lyman WD9 WD10
WD? WD3 WD2
Pisgah Natl Forest unnel Rd - Hampton Home (E Aville)
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
158
RAD
Home (?)
Walk
Run
WD3
WD9
WD3
Home
Exercise, Fitness
159 160
RAD RAD
Home (Oakley area) RAD
Car Walk
Walk Run
WD6 WD4
WD10 WD9
WD6 WD9
Home (Oakley area) ?
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
161
RAD
Home (Bent Creek)
Car
Run
WD11
WD1
WD11
Home (Bent Creek)
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
162
RAD
Home (Five Points)
Car
Walk
WD11
WD1
WD11
Home (Five Points)
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
163
RAD
Home (28806)
Car
Run
WD18
WD4
round @ Haywood
WD18
Home (28806)
Exercise, Fitness
164
RAD
Arden
Car
Run
WD18
WD4
round @ Haywood
WD18
Arden
Exercise, Fitness
165
RAD
Home (Tunnel Rd and Kenilworth)
Car
Run
WD3
WD18
166
RAD
Home (N Aville-Howland)
Car
167
RAD
Riverside Dr Complex
Car
Run
WD1 aggy Dam Reservoir
WD6 Walk
WD3
RAD
Home (28806) ?
Summit parking loh - Riverside Dr (home)
White Duck Taco
Hotel Mills Gap Rd (home) Hotel (near VA in Haw Creek)
Sightse
Exercise, Fitness Sightseeing, Art, Entertaercise and fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
Exercise, Fitness
WD3
Tunnel Rd and Kenilworth)
Exercise, Fitness
WD21
WD6
me (N Aville-Howland)
Exercise, Fitness
RAD
WD3
verside Dr Complex
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
Sightse Sightse
Dinin
168
RAD
W Aville
Car
Run
WD6
Amboy Bridge
WD6
W Aville
Exercise, Fitness
169 170
RAD RAD
E Aville Near Biltmore Estate
Car Car
Run Run
WD5 WD6
WD5
E Aville
Exercise, Fitness Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
171
RAD
Candler
Car
Skate (roller, board)
WD3
WD3
Candler
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
172
RAD
White Duck
Car
Walk
WD1
D23 (Amboy Bridg
White Duck
WD1
WD1
173
RAD
W Aville
Car
Bike
WD21
White Duck Taco
White Duck
?
W Aville
174
RAD
W Aville
WD14
WD22
New Belgium
WD14
W Aville
175
RAD
Woodfin
Car
Bike
WD5
WD2
RAD
WD5
176
RAD
Outside of Aville
Car
Run
WD6
?
?
WD6
177
RAD
S Aville
Car
Walk
WD5
WD9
Baby Bull
178
RAD
Kenilworth
Bicycle
Bike
WD6
179
RAD
East Aville
Car
Run
E Aville
180
RAD
Haywood (?)
Car
Walk
181
RAD
E Aville
Car
Bike
182
RAD
Shiloh
Car
Walk
183
RAD
184
WD22 unplanned, don't know
Amboy Bridge ould've been WD1
RAD
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Dining, Shopping, Erraercise and fitness
Sightse Dinin
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
Maybe a brewery
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
Sightse
WD5
S Aville
Exercise, Fitness
Dinin
Sunset, back hom
Broadway
Home (Sunset?)
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
WD9
RAD
W2
W2
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
WD4
WD23
Home
WD4
Home
Exercise, Fitness
WD3
Amboy Bridge
WD3
E Aville
WD3
not sure
WD3
Shiloh
Exercise, Fitness
W Aville
WD4
WD23
WD4
W Aville
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
RAD
Kenilworth
WD2
WD6
Wedge
WD2
Kenilworth
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
Sightse
185
RAD
Emma Rd
Car
Bike
WD14
WD1
White Duck
WD14
?
Exercise, Fitness
Dinin
186
RAD
Downtown
Car
Bike
WD1
WD21
WD2
?
Exercise, Fitness
Dinin
187
RAD
Hickory
Car
Walk
WD6
WD5
Studios in RAD
WD6
Hickory
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
188 189
RAD RAD
Weaverville (home) Spartenburg
Car Car
Bike Walk
WD6 WD10
WD21 WD1 (?)
Hominy Ck White Duck
WD6 WD10
Weaverville (home) Spartenburg
Exercise, Fitness Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
190
RAD
S Aville
Car
Bike
WD21
WD1
WD21
S Aville
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
191
RAD
Montford Ave
Car
Walk
WD6
WD8
2 Bones & gallerie
WD6
Montford Ave
Dining, Shopping, Errands
192
RAD
Weaverville
Car
Walk
WD5
WD8
sibly Foundy for lu
WD5
Weaverville
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
193 194
RAD RAD
S Aville Alaxander
Car Car
Bike Walk
WD5 WD6
WD5 WD6
S Aville Alexander
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Run, cycle
WD23 elburne/Sandhill Amboy Bridge
Sightse
195 196
RAD RAD
Salvage Station Burnsville
Car Car
Walk Bike
WD6 WD15
WD3 ???? k 2. Broadway WD1; Craven St
WD6 WD15
Infocenter Burnsville
Dining, Shopping, Errands Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
197
RAD
Burnsville
Car
Bike
WD16
k 2. Broadway WD1; Craven St
WD16
Burnsville
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
198
RAD
Oakley
Car
Walk
WD8
WD5
E Aville/Tunnel Rd
WD8
Oakley
Exercise, Fitness
Dinin
199
RAD
Reynolds/home
Car
Walk
WD6
WD8
Baby Bull
WD6
Reynolds/home
Exercise, Fitness
Dinin
200 201 202 203 204
RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD
Fairview/home ? Home Cedar Wood Reynolds Home
Car Car Car Car Walk
Run Run Walk Walk Run
WD2 WD4 WD2 WD4 WD1
WD14 WD10 WD9 WD2 WD21
Amboy/Carrier Dog park
? WD4 WD2 WD4 WD1
Fairview/home ? Home?
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Sightse Sightse
205
RAD
Michigan Ave near Haywood
Walk
Walk
WD22
WD6
WD22
206
RAD
Home
Car
Walk
WD10
WD1
WD10
Home
Exercise, Fitness
207
RAD
84 Clingman
Walk
Walk
WD22
WD6
84 Clingman
Exercise, Fitness
208
RAD
Home
Car
Run
WD2
WD9
WD2
Home
Exercise, Fitness
209
RAD
Leicester
Car
Run
WD6
WD12
WD6
Leicester
Exercise, Fitness
210 211
RAD RAD
Home Ultra
Bicycle Car
Bike Walk
WD2 WD8
WD1
w Belgium, White D
WD21 WD8
Home W Aville
Exercise, Fitness Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
Sightse Dinin
212
RAD
W Aville
Car
Walk
WD6
WD8
RAD, Foundy
RAD
Dining, Shopping, Errands
Sightse
213
RAD
Home
Car
Skate (roller, board)
WD2
WD9
WD2
Home
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
214
RAD
Fairview
Car
Bike
WD17
Fairview
Exercise, Fitness
215 216 217 218 219 220
RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD
NW Aville Fairview-home Leicester - Old County Home Rd Candler Supper Club W Aville-home
Car Car Car Car Car Car
Run Walk Run Walk Walk Walk
?
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
221
RAD
S Aville
Car
222 223
RAD RAD
Woodfin Candler
224
RAD
225 226 227 228 229
?
WD17 Carrier Parkth ends/twice round Bike
WD3 WD14 WD22 WD23 WD2 WD5
FBR Park WD2 WD9 WD9 WD9 WD9
FBR WD14 WD22 WD23 WD2 WD5
Bike
WD5
WD21
WD5
Car Car
Run
WD22 WD22
Home
Car
Walk
WD4
RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD
Home Candler W Aville/home Woodfin/home Home
Bicycle Car Walk Walk Car
Walk Bike Run Run
WD6 WD6 WD2 WD14 WD2
230
RAD
RAD
Walk
Run
231 232 233 234 235
RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD
Downtown Hotel Hotel Home Hernsonville, Horse Shoe
Walk Car Car Walk Car
Walk Walk Run Run
WD5
Home gan Ave near Haywood
er - Old County Home Rd Candler Supper Club W Aville-home
WD9 to Reed Ck, downtown, Clingman WD11 The Owl ? WD8 WD21
WD8 ea, maybe New Belgium WD6 WD2 WD6 WD2 WD2 WD6 WD9 WD2 New Belgium ?
Sightse
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Sightse
Sightse
Dinin Sightse
S Aville
Exercise, Fitness
Woodfin Candler
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
WD4
Home
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
WD6 WD6 WD2 WD14 WD2
Home
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
to Hominy Ck thru Carrier to this tra WD22 WD22 Hominy Ck onto this sect WD9
Sightse
W Aville - The Owl Woodfin-home Home
WD5 WD4 WD6 WD6 WD6
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Market St Hotel Hotel Home
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Exercise, Fitness Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Sightse Sightse
236
RAD
Kenilworth
Car
Run
WD3
WD21
WD3
Exercise, Fitness
237
RAD
W Aville, Logan Circle
Walk
Walk
WD22
WD9
WD22
238
RAD
Leicester
Walk
Run
WD3
WD21
WD3
239
RAD
by Hall Fletcher School
Walk
Walk
WD10
WD23
WD23
Hall Fletcher School
Exercise, Fitness
240
RAD
W Aville, Logan St
Walk
Walk
WD27
WD23
WD27
W Aville, Logan St
Exercise, Fitness
241 242
RAD RAD
Car Car
Walk Bike
WD6 WD14
WD8 T (sewage treatment)
WD6 WD14
Kenilworth
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
Kenilworth
243
RAD
W Aville, Brevard
Car
Run
WD6
White Duck Taco
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
244 245 246
RAD RAD RAD
Weaverville W Aville Grove Park Inn
Walk Car Bus
Walk Skate (roller, board) Walk
WD4 WD4 WD5
Amboy WD9 WD8
WD4 WD4 WD5
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
Sightse
Boat Ramp Trolly
247
RAD
Downtown
Bicycle
Bike
WD6
WD2
WD6
Downtown
248
RAD
Candler
Car
Bike
WD21
WD21
Candler
Exercise, Fitness
249 250
RAD RAD
Waynesville Waynesville
Car Car
Bike Bike
WD21 WD21
WD2 WD22
WD21 WD21
Waynesville
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
251
RAD
W Aville, Weaverville
WD3
WD9
252 253
RAD RAD
W Aville Weaverville
Walk Car
Walk Bike
WD1 WD6
WD8
254
RAD
Montford
Bicycle
Bike
WD1
255
RAD
Swannanoa
Car
Bike
256
RAD
W Aville
257
RAD
Montford
Walk
258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274
RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD
Candler Foundry Carwell (?) Farms N Aville, Riverside WD4 (staying in van) Airbnb-not sure Summerfield, NC Downtown hotel Haw Creek Hollywood St Weaverville W Aville ? Drive, E Aville W Aville, Riverview E/W Aville Work/Biltmore ? W Aville
Car Car Car Car
Aville, Logan Circle Leicester
Bridge
WD1 (Broadway) roadway/Riversid New Belgium
WD3
Exercise, Fitness
? A RAD tour/Business
Weaverville
Exercise, Fitness Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
WD9
WD1
Montford
Exercise, Fitness
WD1
WD9
WD1
Swanannoa
Exercise, Fitness
WD5
WD8
WD5
W Aville
Dining, Shopping, Errands
Walk
WD1
WD9
WD1
Montford
Exercise, Fitness
Bike Walk Bike
WD8 WD6 WS22 WD1 WD4 WD4 WD5 WD4 WD4 WD6 WD3 WD6 WD5 WD2 WD6 WD6 WD6
WD14 WD4
WD8 WD6 WS22 WD1 WD4
Candler Chapel Hill Carwell (?) Farms N Aville (home) WD4 (van) Downtown Wicked Weed/home Biltmore Haw Creek Hollywood St
Exercise, Fitness Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Exercise, Fitness Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Exercise, Fitness Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Exercise, Fitness
Car Car Car Car Car Car Walk Car Car
Walk Walk Bike Walk Bike Walk Run Walk
Car Car
Walk Walk
12 Bones
WD9 free restroom ? no plan, just stroll WD1 Mellowdrome 12 Bones 12 Bones WD21 WD1 WD5 downtown WD9 Amboy WD9 not sure WD9
WD5 WD4 WD4 WD6 WD3 WD6 WD5 WD2 WD4 WD6 WD6
Sightse Sightse
Exercise, Fitness
WD1 WD6
Skate (roller, board)
RAD Skate Park
Exercise, Fitness
W Aville ? Drive, E Aville W Aville, Riverview E/W Aville Work W Aville
Dinin
Sightse
Sightse
275
RAD
Alexander
Car
Run
WD22
276
RAD
E Aville/Oakley
Car
Bike
WD6
277
RAD
278
RAD
Woodfine (Old Marshall Hwy)
Bike
WD3
WD21
279
RAD
W Aville (home)
Walk
Walk
WD5
WD9
Beer
280 281
RAD RAD
Tunnel Rd W Aville
Bicycle Walk
Bike Walk
WD9 WD3
WD8
Downtown galleries
282
RAD
Weaverville
Car
Bike
WD2
WD21
WastePro
283
RAD
Alexander
Car
Bike
WD2
284 285
RAD RAD
Riverview Home Grown Restaurant
Walk Walk
Walk Walk
286
RAD
Oakley
Car
Run
287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294
RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD
Candler 99 Richmond Hill Rd Westwood Airbnb-Lincoln Park? N Aville Adams Hill Rd (home) White Duck E Aville near Pkwy
Bicycle Walk Walk Car Car Car Car Bicycle
Walk Run Run Walk Walk Run Walk Bike
295
RAD
Swannanoa Depot parking
Car
Walk
WD6
WD2
WD6
Swanannoa
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
296
RAD
Swannanoa Depot parking
Car
Run
WD6
WD1
WD6
Swanannoa
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
297
RAD
Craven parking
Walk
Walk
WD5
WD1
WD5
Craven parking
Exercise, Fitness
298
RAD
S Aville
Car
Walk
WD8
not sure
WD8
S Aville
Exercise, Fitness
299
RAD
Haw Creek
Car
Walk
WD6
WD8
WD6
Haw Creek
Exercise, Fitness
300
RAD
Erwin Hills (home)
Car
Walk
WD3
WD10
WD3
Erwin Hills (home)
Exercise, Fitness
301 302
RAD RAD
Oakley W Aville
Car Car
Walk Walk
WD4 WD6
WD9 WD1
WD4 WD
Oakley W Aville
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
303
RAD
E Aville (home)
Car
WD6
WD21
WD6
E Aville (home)
Exercise, Fitness
304 305
RAD RAD
N Aville (home) W Aville
Car Car
WD2 WD2
WD10 WD10
WD2 WD2
N Aville (home) W Aville
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Track
Run Walk
Run
Skate/roll
WD9
White Duck
WD22
op Amboy-Broadway
tewater raft, Marshall
Exercise, Fitness
WD?
Oakley
Exercise, Fitness
WD3
Woodfin
Exercise, Fitness
WD5
W Aville (home)
Exercise, Fitness
Loop through townirbnb on Tunnel Rd WD3 W Aville
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Dining, Shopping, Errands
WD2
Weaverville
Exercise, Fitness
WD21
WD2
Alexander
Exercise, Fitness
WD9 WD14
bus stop WD1
WD3 WD14
WD21
WD1
WD21
Oakley
Exercise, Fitness
WD6 WD1 WD5 WD4 WD4 WD23 WD1 ?
Candler 9 Richmond Hill Rd Westwood irbnb-Lincoln Park? N Aville (home) dams Hill Rd (home) White Duck E Aville B&B
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
WD6 WD1 WD5 WD4 WD4 WD23 WD1 WD8
WD2 WD9 WD20 WD9 don't know yet not sure; 20 mins, then tur WD1 WD8 WD9 ?
Riverview me Grown Restaurant
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
Sightse
Sightse
Dinin
Sightse
Sightse Sightse
Sightse
Sightse
306
RAD
Gerdwood & Park Ave
Walk
Walk
WD5
307
RAD
Home Grown
308
RAD
Home Grown
309
RAD
Home Grown
310
RAD
Home Grown
Walk
311
RAD
Home Grown
Walk
312
RAD
Home Grown
313
RAD
E Aville/Haw Creek
Car
Walk
WD2
314
RAD
Near White Duck
Walk
Walk
315
RAD
Downtown; CBD
Walk
Walk
316 317 318
RAD RAD RAD
Candler N Aville Tunnel Rd motel
Car Car Car
Walk Walk Walk
319
RAD
W Aville - Euclid
Walk
320
RAD
W Aville (home)
321 322
RAD RAD
323
WD9
WD5
erdwood & Park Ave
Exercise, Fitness
WD10
WD10
Home grown
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
WD10
WD10
Home grown
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
WD10
WD10
Home grown
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
Walk
WD10
WD10
Home grown
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
Walk
WD10
WD10
Home Grown
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
WD10
WD10
Home Grown
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
WD8
WD2
Haw Creek
Exercise, Fitness
WD1
WD6
WD9
Amboy Bridge
WD1
WD9
WD1
Downtown; CBD
Exercise, Fitness
WD1 WD3 WD6
WD6 WD8 WD8
WD23 WD3 WD6
Candler W Aville motel
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
Walk
WD23
WD22
WD23
Euclid Blvd
Exercise, Fitness
Bicycle
Bike
WS22
WD22
WS22
W Aville (home)
Exercise, Fitness
Haw Creek W Aville (Haywood/Allen)
Car Walk
WD3 WD6
WD9
Run
WD3 WD12
RAD
Home - S Slope
Walk
Walk
WD6
WD1
WD6
Home
Exercise, Fitness
324
RAD
Leicester
Car
Skate (roller, board)
WD5
WD12
WD5
Leicester
Exercise, Fitness
325 326
RAD RAD
W Aville (Starnes Cove) Woodfin Airbnb
Car Car
Walk Walk
WD6 WD22
WD1
WD6
gym Woodfin
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
327
RAD
Weaverville/Woodfin (home)
Car
Walk
WD1
WD9
328
RAD
Kenilworth
Car
Run
WD3
WD10
WD3
Kenilworth
Exercise, Fitness
329
RAD
Downtown (home)
Car
Walk
WD8
WD22
WD8
work
Exercise, Fitness
Dinin
330
RAD
Swannanoa (home)
Car
Walk
WD8
WD22
WD8
work
Exercise, Fitness
Dinin
331
RAD
Park Ave (home)
Walk
Walk
WD3
WD8
WD3
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
332
RAD
Dorchester (home)
Walk
Walk
WD22
WD1 & WD8 - family
WD22
Millbrook (home)
Exercise, Fitness
333
RAD
Mt Carmel Acres (home)
Car
Walk
WD6
Wd8
WD6
Carmel Acres (home)
Exercise, Fitness
Walk
Walk
drive
bike
not sure - one mile or so
Exercise, Fitness leaning up trash
Haw Creek Aville (Haywood/Allen)
WD1
Sightse
Dinin
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
verville/Woodfin (hExercise, Fitness play/nature
socializing
334 335 336 337 338
RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD
home Burton St (home) W Aville (home) home Vine Wood ? W Aville (home)
Car Car Car Bicycle Car
Walk Walk Walk Bike Walk
WD3 WD3 WD6 WD3
WD8 + WD1
339
RAD
Home
Car
Walk
WD3
340 341 342 343
RAD RAD RAD RAD
Oakley (home) Logan Ave (home) home N Aville (home)
Car Walk Car Car
Run Walk Skate (roller, board) Run
WD3 WD6 under bridge
344
RAD
Swannanoa (home)
Car
Run
345 346 347
RAD RAD RAD
home N Aville (Norwood) W Aville (home)
Car Car Bicycle
Bike Run Bike
Craven St bridge WD1 WD22
WD11 WD1
348
RAD
Haw Creek (home)
Car
Run
WD8
WD2
349 350 351
RAD RAD RAD
86 Langwell Ave Park Square (home) Bartlett (home)
Walk Walk
Walk Run Run
WD13 WD4 WD6
WD8 WD10
352
RAD
home
Car
Walk
WD22
353 354
RAD RAD
Woodfin (home) Erwin High School, home
Car Car
Run Run
355
RAD
W Aville, N Bear Creek
Car
356 357
RAD RAD
home home
358
RAD
359
Amboy Rd Burton St (home)
WD3
W Aville (home) AB Tech Home
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Commuting Exercise, Fitness
WD10
WD3
?/home
Exercise, Fitness
WD9 WD8 Amboy Amboy
WD3 WD6
Oakley (home) Logan Ave (home) home home
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Exercise, Fitness
home
Exercise, Fitness
WD1
N Aville (home) Woodfin (work)
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Commuting
WD8
Haw Creek (home)
Exercise, Fitness
WD13 WD4
86 Langwell Ave home Bartlett (home)
Dining, Shopping, Errands Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
WD14
WD22
home
Exercise, Fitness
WD1 WD4
WD14 WD9
WD1 WD4
Woodfin (home) home
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
Bike
240
Amboy
240
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
Car Car
Walk Run
WD1 WD2
White Duck Taco WD5
Sightse Sightse
Downtown, work
Car
Run
WD1
RAD
E Aville (home)
Car
Run
360 361
RAD RAD
home home
Car Bicycle
362
RAD
Haywood Services (work)
363
RAD
364
WD9
home WD3
White Duck
FB Park Riverside
Wedge FB Park end Lyman
Dog park
Dinin
WD1 WD2
home home
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
WD10
WD1
Fairview (home)
Exercise, Fitness
WD6
WD9
WD6
E Aville (home)
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
Walk Bike
WD6 WD13
WD9 WD23
WD6 WD2
home home
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Sightse Sightse
Walk
Walk
WD6
WD22
WD6
home
Bicycle
Bike
WD21
?
WD21
RAD
Biltmore Forest (home)
Car
Walk
WD6
WD8
WD6
365
RAD
S Aville (home)
Car
Walk
WD6
WD1
WD6
366
RAD
Beaver Dam and Merrimon
Car
Walk
?
WD8
?
367
RAD
BRCC
Car
Bike
WD2
?
WD6
Hominy Ck Trail
Exercise, Fitness home
tmore Forest (home)
S Aville (home) me, off Elk Mtn Scenic
Candler
Exercise, Fitness
Exercise, Fitness
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
368 369 370
RAD RAD RAD
home W Aville (home) Fairview (home)
Car Walk Car
Walk Walk Walk
WD6 WD6 WD3
371
RAD
Office - 2 blocks away
Bicycle
Bike
WD22
372
RAD
W Aville (home)
Walk
Walk
WD22
6 mile loop
WD21
W Aville (home)
Exercise, Fitness
373 374 375 376
RAD RAD RAD RAD
home office Woodfin (home) A ville (home)
Car
Walk
WD9 WD22 Hominy Ck
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Sightse Sightse Sightse
Bike
WD5 WD22 ? WD21
home
Car Car
WD5 WD22 ? WD1
377
RAD
Central Aville (home)
Car
Walk
WD6
to the end
WD9
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
378 379 380 381
RAD RAD RAD RAD
downtown hotel Asheville (home) home Parking garage
Car Walk Walk Car
Walk Walk Run Walk
WD6 WD22 WD5 WD6
? WD8 WD1
WD6 WD9
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
Sightse Sightse
382
RAD
Home-Biltmore Central (?)
Car
Walk
WD2
WD11
Home-Biltmore Central
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
383
RAD
Home via Leicester Hwy
Car
Walk
WD6
WD9
WD6
?? WD6
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
384
RAD
Car
Bike
WD4
WD21
WD4
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
385
RAD
Woodfin (home)
Car
Walk
WD5
WD9
WD5
Woodfin (home)
Exercise, Fitness
Nature
386
RAD
W Aville
Car
Walk
SP Br
SP Br
W Aville
Exercise, Fitness
Nature
387 388
RAD RAD
Asheville (home) Asheville
Bicycle Bicycle
Bike Bike
WD1 WD9
? Riverview
Asheville (home) Home
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
389
RAD
Work-Aville
Car
Run
WD11
WD3
Work-Aville
Exercise, Fitness
390 391 392 393 394 395
RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD
Cambria Hotel Cambria Hotel Downtown Mars Hill Clingman Ave Home 1/4 mile away (but lives in W'ville?)
Walk Walk Walk Car Walk Car
Walk Walk Walk Walk Walk Run
WD6 WD6 WD6 WD6 WD6 WD2
WD2 WD2 WD2 WD8 (?) WD22 WD9
WD4 WD4 WD4 WD6
Cambria Hotel Cambria Hotel Downtown Aville Airport Home Home
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
396
RAD
Work, S Aville
Car
Run
WD3
WD17
WD3
Haywood Rd
Exercise, Fitness
397 398 399 400 401 402 403
RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD RAD
Work-off of Brevard Haw Creek Fairview - Hickory Nut Gap Farm S Aville Mars Hill
Walk
California for real
Car Car Car Car Car Car Walk
404
RAD
Edward (?) SE WAX Craven Bridge
Bicycle
405 406 407 408
RAD RAD RAD RAD
67 Craggy W Aville Greeville SC Alexander
Bicycle Car Car Car
Bike Walk Walk Skate (roller, board) Walk car
Bike
WD8 WD22 WD9
WD6 WD6
WD22
New Belgium
home W Aville (home) Fairview (home) fice - 2 blocks away
home entral Aville (home)
WD5 White Duck
WD2 ? After 6000 steps WD2 WD5 WD9 WD5 Haw Creek WD6 1/WD9 back and forth WD6 WD6 just south of here WD6 S Aville WD5 maybe WD8 WD5 Aville Airport WD6 (Jean Webb) WD6 (Jean Webb)Not sure, traveling WD5 will float river ng to RAD food tru not sure
Bike
WD6
WD21
Bike Walk Walk Walk
WD5 WD3 WD6 WD6
WD8 WD9 WD8
s, circled entire greenway here making a loop
WD5 WD3 WD6 WD6
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Exercise, Fitness Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment Spread love and truth Spiritual Exercise, Fitness
Desoto Rd Greenville SC Alexander
Sightse Sightse
Commuting Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
Sightse
409
RAD
Kenilworth (home)
Car
410 411 412
RAD RAD RAD
W Aville Candler W Aville
413
RAD
Home (Emma something?)
414
RAD
W Aville (home)
Car
415
RAD
Near UNCA (home)
416
RAD
417
Run
WD8
Kenilworth (home)
Exercise, Fitness
WD23-WD8 t trail, then went t WD23/WD7(&)
WD23 WD22 WD22
W Aville Riverview Dr Candler W Aville
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
WD6
WD8 and WD2
WD6
Home
Sightseeing, Art, Entertainment
Bike
WD5
WD5
WD9
W Aville (home)
Car
Bike
WD4
WD21
WD4
Near UNCA (home)
Exercise, Fitness
Weaverville
Car
Run
WD6
WD14
WD6
Weaverville
Exercise, Fitness
RAD
Weaverville
Car
Walk
Summit
418
RCG
N Aville - Macedonia
Car
Walk
RCG10
RC9
419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438
RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG
Home-Broad Coleman Ave Downtown S Slope Barnard Ave RC10 Beaver Lake Magnolia Ave Barnard Ave Broad St Norwood Park Forsyth St Elizabeth St(?) RC17 RC2 Forsyth St 24 Laurel Ave Merrimon Weaver Park Liberty/Hill Side Magnolia Ave Woodrow Ave
Walk Walk Bicycle Walk Bicycle Car Car Walk Car Walk Walk Walk
Walk Walk Bike Walk Bike Walk Walk Walk Run Run Run
RC11 ? RC17 RC6 RC10 RC7 RC16 RC6 RC3 RC1 RC14
RC3 ? RC3 ?
439
RCG
440
Walk
Run
Walk Walk Car
Walk Walk Skate (roller, board)
Walk Walk
Run Walk
Lookout Dr
Car
Walk
RCG
Weaver Park
Bicycle
Bike
441
RCG
Home
442
RCG
RCG
Home
Bike & roll
WD8 WD10 WD22 WD22
RC2 RC13 RC6 RC3 RC3 RC16 RC3
WD5
skate park
e N to White Duck
bridge
eBon Coffee (RC1 Town Mtn Hominy/Shelburn
RC17 RC3 RC17 RC11 RC11 RC4 Founders RC13 RC1 RC11
RC14 RC7
Summt N Aville (home)
Exercise, Fitness
RC11 Park(?) RC17 ? RC10 RC7 RC16 RC6 RC3 RC11 RC14
Home Coleman Ave Downtown S Slope Barnard
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
RC2 RC12 RC6 RC12
Forsyth St 23 Laurel Ave Verge Apt
RC16 RC15
Liberty/Hill Side Magnolia Ave Woodrow Ave
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Commuting Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Lookout Dr
Exercise, Fitness
Le Bon Woodrow Ave
Sightse
Sightse
Exercise, Fitness
RCG10
?? RC11
Exercise, Fitnessding time with her son
Beaver Lake e-Haw Creek, Woodfin Barnard Ave Murdock Woodward Ave Forsyth St Elizabeth St RC17
RC1
RC17
RC1
Weaver Park
Exercise, Fitness
RC3
RC18
RC
Home
Exercise, Fitness
RC1
RC17
RC1
Weaver
Exercise, Fitness
Socialize
Shopping
443
RCG
Pioneer Building
Bicycle
Bike
RC18
RC3
RC18
Pioneer Building
Exercise, Fitness
444 445 446
RCG RCG RCG
Botanical Gardens Botanical Gardens 35 Chadwick Wade Dr
RC3 RC3 RC3
RC10 RC3
Walk
RC10 RC10 RC9
Botanical Gardens Botanical Gardens 35 Chadwick Wade Dr
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
447
RCG
UNCA
RC4
RC16(?)
RC9
UNCA
Exercise, Fitness
448
RCG
Maney Ave
Walk
Walk
RC9
RC2
RC9
Maney Ave
Exercise, Fitness
449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456
RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG
RC?Home Chestnut Pearson Cumberland Ave Barnard (home) Pearson Mt Clair Ave Hawthorn/?
Walk
Walk
RC4 RC17
RC1?
RC4 RC3
Walk Walk Walk Walk
Walk
RC4 Chestnut Kimberly
457
RCG
Pearson Dr
458 459 460
RCG RCG RCG
461
Car
YoLo
Up and Back
Run
RC16 RC17 RC6 RC12 RC17 RC8 to RC3 to RC16; Merrimon to Mt Clair RC3 Bike RC16
Sunset
RC16
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Commuting Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Pearson Exercise, Fitness Mt Clair Ave Exercise, Fitness Hawthorn/? en returns home, tExercise, Fitness
Walk
Walk
RC11
RC9
survey
RC11
Pearson Dr
Exercise, Fitness
Univ. Dr Barnard Cumberland Ave
Walk Bicycle
Walk Bike
RC7 RC5 RC17
RC17 RC12 RC3
round trip RC3
RC7 RC5 RC17
RC5 Cumberland
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
RCG
Harrison Apts
Walk
Walk
RC17
RC7
UNCA Bookstore
RC17
Harrison Apts
Exercise, Fitness
462
RCG
Hawthorne
Walk
Walk
RC3
Montford
RC3
Hawthorne
Exercise, Fitness
463 464 465
RCG RCG RCG
Lynwood Rd Montford Leicester
Walk Walk Car
Run Run Walk
RC17 RC13 RC17
RC2 RC2 RC12
RC13 RC17
Lynnwood Rd Montford Leicester
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
466
RCG
Northwood/Grovewood
Car
Walk
RC6
RC17
RC6
rthwood/Grovewood
Exercise, Fitness
467 468
RCG RCG
Monroe St 55 W Chestnut St
Walk
Walk
RC17 RC16
RC3 RC3
RC17 RC16
Monroe St 55 W Chestnut St
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
469
RCG
South Slope
Walk
Run
RC16
RC3
RC16
South Slope
Exercise, Fitness
470
RCG
N Weaver Park
Walk
Walk
RC2
loop
RC2
N Weaver Park
Exercise, Fitness
471
RCG
Kenilworth and E Aville
Car
Walk
RC6
RC17
472
RCG
Lee Ave
Walk
Walk
RC6
473
RCG
Flint and Chestnut St
Walk
Walk
474 475 476
RCG RCG RCG
5 Points ? near Merrimon, S Aville retirement communit YMCA
Walk Car Walk
477
RCG
5 Elkwood
Car
478 479 480
RCG RCG RCG
WT Weaver-home Coleman and Merrimon Botanical Gardens
Walk Walk Car
Walk
Walk Run Bike
Car
home
sometimes to RAD
RC6
asn't sure-first time
RC3
RC13
RC2 RC4 RC12
loop RC17 RC3
Run
RC12
RC17
Walk Walk Run
RC2 RC5 RC10
RC11 5 Pts RC3
Run Walk
Run
RC6 RC12
Back to YMCA
nilworth and E Aville
Sightse
Dinin Socialize
Exercise, Fitness
Lee Ave
Exercise, Fitness
Flint and Chestnut
Exercise, Fitness
RC2 RC4 RC3
home S Aville YMCA
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
RC12
5 Elkwood
Exercise, Fitness
RC2 WT Weaver-home leman and Merrim Hanger Hall leman and Merrimon RC17 Botanical Gardens
Dinin
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
Socialize Socialize
481
RCG
Austin Ave
Walk
Run
482 483 484 485
RCG RCG RCG RCG
Luella's Barnard Vivian Reed Creek RC16
Car Car Car Car
Walk Run Walk Run
486
RCG
N Aville
Car
Walk
RC10
487 488 489 490 491
RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG
Botanical Gardens Catawba St Magnolia Park 330 Merrimon North St-home
Walk Walk
Walk Run
RC19 RC13
Walk Walk
Walk Walk
RC14 RC11
492
RCG
Botanical Gardens
Car
Walk
493
RCG
Botanical Gardens
494 495 496 497 498
RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG
Magnolia RC16 Merrimon & Weaver RC1 Botanical Gardens RC10 Botanical Gardens Flint and Chestnut St
Walk Walk Car Car Walk
Walk Walk Run Walk Walk
RC16
499
RCG
Office on Merrimon
Walk
Run
RC9
RC9
500
RCG
Merrimon
Car
RC3
RC17
501
RCG
Weaver Park
Car
Bike
RC2
RC17
502
RCG
Elizabeth St
Car
Run
RC17
503
RCG
Weaver Park
Car
Walk
RC3
504
RCG
Merrimon
Walk
Walk
505 506
RCG RCG
Hyanis St RC10
Walk Car
Walk Run
RC7 RC10
RC17 RC2
507
RCG
work/downtown
Walk
RC16
RC3
508 509 510 511 512
RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG
Weaver Park Cauble, Weaverville Grove Arcade/home Cauble-Hillside Norwood Park
Car Walk Walk
Run Run
RC16(?) RC? RC1
Walk
Run
RC2 RC14 RC16 RC14 RC2
513
RCG
Tacoma Circle
Walk
Run
RC9
514 515 516 517 518
RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG
Luella's Montview Dr Botanical Gardens Hyanis Dr ?
Walk Car Walk
Run Walk Run
RC2 RC14 RC10 RC7 RC16
519
RCG
Grovewood/Maplewood
Bicycle
Bike
RC3
Bike
Run
RC3
RC9
RC3 RC4 RC8 to RC3 to RC16; Merrimo ?
RC17
Bike
Friend's Meeting
RC3
Austin Ave
RC3 RC4 RC8
Luella's Barnard Vivian lot RC16
RC8
RC10
N Aville (home)
Exercise, Fitness
RC7 RC3 Merrimon RC3 RC9
RC19 RC12
Botanical Gardens Catawba St Magnolia Ave 330 Merrimon North St-home
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Commuting
?
Botanical Gardens
Exercise, Fitness
Merrimon RC3
Botanical Gardens
Exercise, Fitness
RC17 RC17 RC3 RC3
RC14 RC11
Vivian Lot RC8 - UNCA trails to Mt Clare RC8 RC8 Merrimon & Weavewr Weaver/RC12 Elizabeth St RC 17; ? Street RC3 Elizabeth RC17 Weaver Park Weaver Park RC17 RC9 Flint and Chestnut UNCA trails, turned around RC9
Commuting
ercise and fitness
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Dining, Shopping, Erraercise and fitness
Sightse
Sightse
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
RC3
Merrimon
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
RC2
Weaver Park
Exercise, Fitness
Sightse
RC?
RC17
Elizabeth St
Exercise, Fitness
RC16(?)
RC2
Weaver Park
Exercise, Fitness
Merrimon
Commuting
Hyanis St Fairview/home
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
home/N Aville
Commuting
Weaver Park
5 Guys after
Montford RC7 RC10
king thru neighborhood
RC11
RC14 RC1 RC1 RC2
Grove Arcade/home Cauble-Hillside Norwood Park
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
RC17
RC17
Tacoma Circle
Exercise, Fitness
RC2 RC7 RC7 RC16
Luella's Montview Dr Botanical Gardens Hyanis Dr ?
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
RC3
ovewood/Maplewood
Exercise, Fitness
RC17 RC17 errimon to B gardens to Elizabeth RC17 RC3 RC9?
Sightse
Sightse
Socialize
Socialize
520
RCG
Coffe shop @ Catawba
Car
RC14
RC5
521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537
RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG RCG
Weaverville Downtown Montford Beaverdam/Webb Cove (Home) Woodrow (home) 5 Points Mt Clare/Marlowe (home) Grovewood Rd/Sumner Pl (home) Montford Broadway & Elizabeth Larchmont & Merrimon King St (home) Weaverville Botanical Gardens Norwood Park 5 Points Merrimon & Edgewood
Car Walk Walk Car Walk Bicycle Walk Bicycle Walk
Walk Walk Walk Walk Walk Bike Run Bike Run
Walk
RC10 RC17 RC13 RC10 RC17 RC1 RC3 RC3 RC13 RC17 RC4 RC5 RC6 RC10 RC3 RC14 RC7
RC3 RC5 RC1 RC3 RC6 RC10 RC17 RC9 RC3 RC6 RC11 RC17 RC12 RC3 RC17 RC8 RC16(?)
Car Walk Car Walk Walk
Walk Walk
Walk
538
RCG
?/home
Walk
Run
RC7
RC16(?)
539
RCG
Montford (home)
Walk
Walk
RC17
RC1
540
RCG
Norwood Park
RC2
RC17
541 542 543 544 545
RCG
Pine Crest Inn, Montford
RC16
Walk Walk
Run
UNCA walking
Hi Five GPI home Woodrow (home) home home Beaver Lake
Hi Five loop Chestnut & Broadw
WT Weaver
RC14
ffee shop @ Catawba
Exercise, Fitness
RC10 RC17 RC13 RC10 RC17 RC1 RC3 RC3 RC13 RC17 RC4 RC5 RC6 RC10 RC3
Home Downtown Montford dam/Webb Cove (home) Woodrow (home) 5 Points Clare/Marlowe (home) ood Rd/Sumner Pl (home) Montford oadway & Elizabeth rchmont & Merrimon King St (home) Weaverville Botanical Gardens Norwood Park 5 Points errimon & Edgewood
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Commuting Exercise, Fitness Commuting Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
RC7
home
Exercise, Fitness
RC17
Montford (home)
Exercise, Fitness
RC2
Norwood Park
Exercise, Fitness
RC2
Exercise, Fitness
10. Secondary Secondary Purpose Purpose Other (Choice) (Fill) 1 ng, Shopping, Errands 2
#
11. Active Minutes (Fill) 45 60
12. How Often Use Trail Use Trail Notes / Other (Fill) (Choice) Few times a week 2-3 times a month
13. Primary Primary Activity Activity Other (Choice) (Fill) Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
3 4 5
60 60
Few times a week 2-3 times a month
1080
Few times a week
7 8 ng, Shopping, Errands
60 90
Few times a week Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
9 ng, Shopping, Errands
45
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
10
60-90
First visit
Walking/Rolling
11
105
A few times per year
12
20
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
13
120
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
60 40-60 100 45 90 15
Few times a week Few times a week Few times a week Few times a week Few times a week First visit
Walking/Rolling Bicycling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
6 Exercise, Fitness
14 15 ng, Shopping, Errands 16 17 Exercise, Fitness 18 Exercise, Fitness 19
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
20
75
21
90
Few times a week
Bicycling
60
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
30-45 50 90 90 57
Few times a week Few times a week Few times a week Everyday Few times a week
Running Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
29
90
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
30
90
Everyday
Running
31
30
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
120 12 Miles
Everyday Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
60
Few times a week
22
Commuting
23 24 eeing, Art, Entertainment 25 26 27 ng, Shopping, Errands 28
32 33 Exercise, Fitness 34 rands
35 ng, Shopping, Errands
14. $Restaurants (Fill) $ 10
Where (Fill)
$Retail (Fill)
LeBonn Coffee
$
5
Wedge
$
3
LeBonn Coffee
$
$Groceries (Fill)
Where (Fill)
x
x
x
x
35
Running
x $
80 Tailgate Market x
Bicycling
Few times a week
$
10
Le bon Café
$
30 Tail Gate Market
$
80 Tail Gate Market
Running
x
Walking/Rolling
Bicycling
x
$
75
Market
Where (fill)
$Entertainmen t (Fill)
Where (Fill)
36 ng, Shopping, Errands
60
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
$
40
Market
37
120
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
$
10
gas
38
60
2-3 times a month
Walking/Rolling
39 Exercise, Fitness
40
Few times a week
Walking/Rollingning, Bicycling, Skating
$
50 Tailgate Market
40 Exercise, Fitness
60
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
Em
90
Few times a week
20-30
Everyday
44
60
Few times a week
Running
45
60-75
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
90
Few times a week
60 20 60-90 40 45 20
Once per month Few times a week 2-3 times a month Few times a week Few times a week 2-3 times a month
Running Bicycling Bicycling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
53 ng, Shopping, Errands
90
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
54
90
2-3 times a month
Walking/Rolling Enjoying nature
55 ng, Shopping, Errands 56
50 60
Few times a week 2-3 times a month
Running
57
120
Few times a week
Running
58 59 60 61
60 60 30 Hours
Few times a week First visit Few times a week Everyday
62
45
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
63
40
Few times a week
Running
60
Once per month
Running
65 66
60 90
Few times a week Few times a week
Running Running
67
120
Few times a week
68
30
Few times a week
69 ng, Shopping, Errands
60
Few times a week
70
80
Few times a week
71
30
Few times a week
Bicycling
72
60
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
42 ng, Shopping, Errands 43
46 ng, Shopping, Errands 47 eeing, Art, Entertainment 48 eeing, Art, Entertainment 49 50 Exercise, Fitness 51 Exercise, Fitness 52 eeing, Art, Entertainment
64
mental health
x
Bicycling
$
15
High Five
x
x
Tailgate Market
Bicycling
Bicyling
Walking/Rolling
$
30 Tailgate Market
$ $ $
50 Tailgate Market 60 Tailgate Market 50 Tailgate Market
$
60 Tailgate Market
70-100
Tailgate Market
40-60 0-5
100 Tailgate Market Tailgate Market Tailgate Market
$
Walking/Rolling
?
$
25
Cracker Barrel
$
15
Dunkin Donuts
$
15
Five Points
Tailgate Market
$
10
City Bakery
$
75
Ingles
$
10 Tailgate Market
Walking/Rolling
73 74
60 60
A few times per year Few times a week
Bicycling Walking/Rolling
75
45
Few times a week
Running
76 77 78 79 80 81
60 60 30-60 45 60 60
Everyday Few times a week Everyday First visit Everyday A few times per year
Walking/Rolling Bicycling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
82
69
Few times a week
Bicycling
2-3 hrs
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
84 Exercise, Fitness
60
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
85 86
60 120
Few times a week
87
45
2-3 times a month
88 89 Exercise, Fitness
50 20
90 91
$
20 Tailgate Market
$
50 Tailgate Market
$
20 Tailgate Market
$
25 Tailgate Market
$
65 Tailgate Market
Bicycling
$
80 Tailgate Market
Few times a week 2-3 times a month
Running Bicycling
$
70 Tailgate Market
60
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
40
First visit
Walking/Rolling
60-90
Few times a week
Running
93
60
Everyday
94
60
95
83 ng, Shopping, Errands
92 ng, Shopping, Errands
bicycling $
10
Coffee shop
Running
Running
2x/day
ating/skateboarding
$
Bicycling
Walk dog
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
Frisbee
90
Few times a week
Running
96 97
120 180
First visit First visit
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
98
30
2-3 times a month
Bicycling
99 eeing, Art, Entertainment
60
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
100eeing, Art, Entertainment
35
Few times a week
101 ng, Shopping, Errands
90
Few times a week
Bicycling
10-25
Wedge
102eeing, Art, Entertainment
75
Few times a week
Bicycling
8-10
water and snacks
103
60
A few times per year
Walking/Rolling
104
20
2-3 times a month
Walking/Rolling
105 Exercise, Fitness
120
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
$ 40-50
60 ffee, beer (did not specify) ?
Bicycling
$
25
?
Bicylcling 8
coffee
30
RAD browsing
106
20
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
Running
107eeing, Art, Entertainment
180
Everyday
Bicycling
walk & runn
108eeing, Art, Entertainment
90
First visit
Bicycling
$
30
109
no idea
First visit
Walking/Rolling
$
50 staurants/breweries
110eeing, Art, Entertainment
60-120
First visit
Walking/Rolling
$
111eeing, Art, Entertainment
60-80
First visit
Walking/Rolling
40
Few times a week
Bicycling
20-30 45 120
First visit First visit Everyday
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
120
A few times per year
Walking/Rolling
117 Exercise, Fitness
4-5 hrs
First visit
118 Exercise, Fitness
4-5 hrs
119
?
8
Summit Coffee
$ $ $
15 10 5
? New Belgium beer
Walking/Rolling
$
25 ad (on Biltmore) and Wedge
First visit
Walking/Rolling
$
25 ad (on Biltmore) and Wedge
45
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
120
90
Few times a week
Bicycling
$
10
121
30
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
$
40 drinks and food
122
45
2-3 times a month
Walking/Rolling
180-240
First visit
Bicycling
60
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
60-90
Everyday
126 ng, Shopping, Errands
60
Few times a week
127eeing, Art, Entertainment
180
Few times a week
128eeing, Art, Entertainment 129eeing, Art, Entertainment 130 131eeing, Art, Entertainment 132eeing, Art, Entertainment 133eeing, Art, Entertainment 134
45 45 60
First visit Few times a week Everyday Few times a week
Running Running Running Bicycling
60
Few times a week Everyday
Running
135
45
Few times a week
Running
112 113 114eeing, Art, Entertainment 115 ng, Shopping, Errands 116
123 Exercise, Fitness 124 125eeing, Art, Entertainment
ating/skateboarding
Bicycling
60-100
FB Outfitters
hite Duck and Wedge
Walking/Rollingng, skating/skateboarding Running
$
Walking/Rolling g, skating/skatebo $
16
Summit Coffee
12 offee, New Belgium, Wedge
$ $
15 15
? ?
$ $
10 20
? ?
$
50
?
136eeing, Art, Entertainment
60
Once per month
Walking/Rolling
137
120
2-3 times a month
Bicycling
138
40
Few times a week
Running
139
45
Once per month
Walking/Rolling
25 20-25
Everyday Few times a week
Walking/Rolling Running
142eeing, Art, Entertainment
30
Few times a week
Running
143eeing, Art, Entertainment 144eeing, Art, Entertainment
60 30
Few times a week Few times a week
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
$
9
?
145
120
2-3 times a month
Walking/Rolling
$
10
Summit
146 147 148eeing, Art, Entertainment
120 60 45
First visit Few times a week First visit
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
$
50
?
149
60-120
Everyday
Bicycling
150
120
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
151
15
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
152eeing, Art, Entertainment
40
First visit
Walking/Rolling
153eeing, Art, Entertainment
30
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
$
5
Summit
45-60
Few times a week
Walking/Rollingunning and bicycling
155 156eeing, Art, Entertainment 157eeing, Art, Entertainment
60 60 60
A few times per year
Running $
30
?
Few times a week
Running
158
30
Everyday
Running
159 160
60 40
Everyday Few times a week
Walking/Rolling Running
161eeing, Art, Entertainment
70
Few times a week
162eeing, Art, Entertainment
30
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
$
20
?
163
270
Few times a week
Running
164
150
2-3 times a month
Running
165
120
2-3 times a month
Running
166 ng, Shopping, Errands
120
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
$
15
Ulta
?
2-3 times a month
Walking/Rolling
140 ng, Shopping, Errands 141
154
167
$
10
White Duck
$
Running
40
W Aville Ingles
168
?
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
$
169 170
? don’t know yet
Few times a week First visit
Running Walking/Rolling
don't know yet
?
171
?
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
172
120
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
10-20/per person
White Duck
173eeing, Art, Entertainment
60
Few times a week
Bicycling
174 ng, Shopping, Errands
40
Few times a week
Bicycling
175eeing, Art, Entertainment
?
Few times a week
Bicycling
176eeing, Art, Entertainment
?
A few times per year
Walking/Rolling
$
50 Wedge, Zillicoa
177 ng, Shopping, Errands
60
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
$
40
178eeing, Art, Entertainment
180
Few times a week
Bicycling
179eeing, Art, Entertainment
45
Few times a week
Running
5-10
180
75
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
5-10
r, money to homeless
181
40
Few times a week
Bicycling
10-15
le doughnuts, Wedge
182
30-60
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling running, bicycle
183eeing, Art, Entertainment
90
2-3 times a month
Walking/Rolling
184eeing, Art, Entertainment
40
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling running, bicycling
185 ng, Shopping, Errands
120
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
186 ng, Shopping, Errands
45
Once per month
Bicycling
187
30
A few times per year
Walking/Rolling
188 189
60 120
Few times a week First visit
Running Walking/Rolling
190
90
Few times a week
191
60
First visit
192 Exercise, Fitness
120
193eeing, Art, Entertainment 194
60
Few times a week Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
Bicycling Walking/Rolling
6
coffee shop
maybe
bicycling
bicycling
$
coffee shops
20 20-60
$
beer ?
25 ?
bicycling
Baby Bull
White Duck k, Hominy (?) Outdoor Center
$
50
don't know
$ $
25 beer, don't know 30 don't know yet
$
20
White Duck
$
30
12 Bones
$
20
?
don't know yet
galleries
30-70
galleries
195eeing, Art, Entertainment 196 Exercise, Fitness
60 120
First visit First visit
Walking/Rolling Bicycling
$ $
15 20
Ultra ?
$
100
REI
197 Exercise, Fitness
120
2-3 times a month
Bicycling
$
20
?
$
100
REI
198 ng, Shopping, Errands
30
A few times per year
Walking/Rolling
199 ng, Shopping, Errands
120
2-3 times a month
Walking/Rolling
200eeing, Art, Entertainment 201eeing, Art, Entertainment 202 Exercise, Fitness 203 204eeing, Art, Entertainment
70 45 60 90 ?
Few times a week 2-3 times a month 2-3 times a month Few times a week 2-3 times a month
Running Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Running
205 Exercise, Fitness
90
Few times a week
206eeing, Art, Entertainment
60
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
208eeing, Art, Entertainment
35
2-3 times a month
Running
209
75
Few times a week
Running
210eeing, Art, Entertainment 211 ng, Shopping, Errands
60-75
Few times a week Few times a week
Bicycling Walking/Rolling
212eeing, Art, Entertainment
90
First visit
Walking/Rolling
$ $ $
500 100 150
RAD art art
$ $
50
$
30 l, Smoky Park, White Duck
$
10
200
E Aville
200
Walmart
Baby Bull
207
213eeing, Art, Entertainment
20-50 $
Starbucks New Belgium
50
2-3 times a month
Foundation ?
214
90
2-3 times a month
Bicycling
215 216 217 ng, Shopping, Errands 218 Socialize 219eeing, Art, Enterta Socialize 220
180 45 40 60 10 51
Few times a week Everyday 2-3 times a month 2-3 times a month Few times a week
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Running Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
221
60
Everyday
Bicycling
$
10
New Belgium
222 223
120 120
Few times a week Few times a week
Running Running
bikes and walking $ $
15 15
? ?
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
224eeing, Art, Entertainment 225 226 227 228 229eeing, Art, Entertainment
390 90 35 140 30
Once per month Few times a week Few times a week Few times a week Everyday
Running Bicycling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
230 Exercise, Fitness
120
A few times per year
6-8 hrs 90 90 40 90
First visit A few times per year First visit Few times a week 2-3 times a month
231 Exercise, Fitness 232eeing, Art, Entertainment 233 Exercise, Fitness 234eeing, Art, Entertainment 235
$
$
25
?
Running 5-50
brewery
30-60
brewery
$ $
15 he Owl/Sunny Point 6 miny Ck FB Outfitters
Running
$
50
?
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Running Running
$ $ $
50 12 13
RAD ?
236
160
Few times a week
Running
60
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
238
90
Few times a week
Running
239
120
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
240
90
241eeing, Art, Entertainment 242
30 60
First visit Few times a week
Walking/Rolling Bicycling
243eeing, Art, Entertainment
60
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
244eeing, Art, Entertainment 245 246
60
2-3 times a month Everyday First visit
Walking/Rolling
247
180
Few times a week
Bicycling
248
75
Everyday
Bicycling
249eeing, Art, Entertainment 250eeing, Art, Entertainment
120 120
A few times per year First visit
251
120
Few times a week
252 253
60 30
Few times a week
254
60
Everyday
Running
255
60
2-3 times a month
Bicycling
$
5
White Duck
256 Exercise, Fitness
60
First visit
Walking/Rolling
$
50
12 Bones
257
60
Few times a week
Running
258 ng, Shopping, Errands 259 Exercise, Fitness 260 261 262eeing, Art, Entertainment 263 264 265 266 267 Exercise, Fitness 268 269eeing, Art, Entertainment 270 Exercise, Fitness 271 272 273 274
60 30 90 60 10 20 120 60 80 60 75 60 35 50 60 60 50
2-3 times a month First visit 2-3 times a month Few times a week
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Bicycling Running
$
60 ffee shop, 12 Bones
First visit First visit First visit 2-3 times a month Few times a week Few times a week Few times a week First visit Everyday A few times per year First visit Few times a week
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Bicycling Walking/Rolling Bicycling Walking/Rolling Running Walking/Rolling
237
Socialize
$
10
Hole
Running
$
15
Ultra
Bicycling One wheel
$
40
12 Bones
Bicycling Bicycling
$ $
30 100
New Belgium New Belgium
Running
ating/skateboardi $
Walking/Rolling
35 b, Wedge, Smoky Park
Bicycling
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
$ Bicycling
$
$ $ $ $
20 vary 30 TBD 30 Wicked Weed 100 offee and Biltmore
$
50
12 Bones
$
15
TBD
$ $
40 50
coffee, etc ?
200
Target, TJ Maxx
10
Skate Park
275eeing, Art, Entertainment
30
First visit
Running
90-120
Few times a week
Bicycling
278eeing, Art, Entertainment
120
Few times a week
279
90
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
280 Exercise, Fitness 281eeing, Art, Entertainment
10 45
First visit First visit
Bicycling Walking/Rolling
282
55
Everyday
283
60
Few times a week
284 285 ng, Shopping, Errands
60 120
Few times a week Few times a week
Walking/Rolling ating/skateboarding Walking/Rolling $
286
90
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
287 Commuting 288 289eeing, Art, Entertainment 290 291 292 293eeing, Art, Entertainment 294eeing, Art, Entertainment
75 75 60 70 40 51 20 120-180
2-3 times a month Everyday Everyday First visit Few times a week 2-3 times a month Few times a week First visit
Walking/Rolling Running
295 Exercise, Fitness
60-120
First visit
296 Exercise, Fitness
60-120
276
$
30
White Duck
$
30
unknown
277
?
unknown
Bicycling 15
Home Grown
Running
$
13
Summit
Running
$ $
40 10
lunch, TBD lunch
$
25
?
Walking/Rolling
$
20 coffee/ice cream
First visit
Walking/Rolling
$
20 coffee/ice cream
First visit
Walking/Rolling
90-120
2-3 times a month
Walking/Rolling
45
2-3 times a month
Walking/Rolling
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
45 50
2-3 times a month First visit
Walking/Rolling
303
60-90
2-3 times a month
Bicycling
304 305
60 40
A few times per year
Running
297 298 299eeing, Art, Entertainment
300
301 302eeing, Art, Entertainment
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Bicycling
scooter 40-50
$
ark, Summit, White Duck
5
coffee
$
150
Art
306
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
307eeing, Art, Entertainment
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
$
8
Home Grown
308eeing, Art, Entertainment
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
$
8
Home Grown
309eeing, Art, Entertainment
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
$
8
Home Grown
310eeing, Art, Entertainment
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
$
8
Home Grown
311eeing, Art, Entertainment
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
$
8
Home Grown
312eeing, Art, Entertainment
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
$
8
Home grown
313
40
2-3 times a month
Walking/Rolling
314
8 hrs
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
315eeing, Art, Entertainment
120
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
316 317 318 Exercise, Fitness
60 30 90-120
2-3 times a month Everyday First visit
Walking/Rolling
319
70-90
Everyday
320 ng, Shopping, Errands
60
Few times a week
321 322
45 45
Everyday
323
60
Everyday
324
60-70
Few times a week
Skating
325 326eeing, Art, Entertainment
10 45
Few times a week A few times per year
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
327
120
Few times a week
328
60-90
Few times a week
Running
329 ng, Shopping, Errands
30-60
2-3 times a month
330 ng, Shopping, Errands
30-60
331eeing, Art, Entertainment
10-15
coffee
$
3
All Day Darling
$
30
lunch
$
22
Home Grown
$
5
Penny Cup
Walking/Rolling
$
5
coffee
2-3 times a month
Walking/Rolling
$
5
coffee
60
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
$
9
Summit
332
65
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
333
45
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
Walking/Rolling
g loop; will go up W
Bicycling Running
some walking
Bicycling
334 335 336 337 338
60 25 60 33 45
Everyday Few times a week Few times a week Everyday Everyday
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Bicycling Walking/Rolling
339
30
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
60 25 20 30-35
Few times a week Everyday Everyday 2-3 times a month
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Skating Running
344
7
2-3 times a month
Running
345 346 347 Exercise, Fitness
30
2-3 times a month
Bicycling
45
Everyday
Bicycling
348
80
Few times a week
Running
210 45 40
2-3 times a month Few times a week Few times a week
Walking/Rolling Running Running
5 miles
Everyday
Running
353 354eeing, Art, Entertainment
75 60
Everyday Few times a week
355eeing, Art, Entertainment
30
Few times a week
Bicycling
356eeing, Art, Entertainment 357eeing, Art, Entertainment
90
First visit
Walking/Rolling
358
40
Few times a week
Running
359eeing, Art, Entertainment
30
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
360eeing, Art, Entertainment 361eeing, Art, Entertainment
60 90
Everyday Few times a week
Walking/Rolling Bicycling
362
60
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
363eeing, Art, Entertainment
120
Few times a week
Bicycling
20
Once per month
Walking/Rolling
365
35
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
366
25
2-3 times a month
Walking/Rolling
90
Few times a week
Bicycling
340 ng, Shopping, Errands 341 342 Exercise, Fitness 343
Commuting
349 Exercise, Fitness 350 351 352
364
367
Commuting
Commuting
$ Running
$
5
coffee
$
30
Wedge
$
15
?
$
50
30
?
368eeing, Art, Entertainment 369eeing, Art, Entertainment 370
40 60 60
Everyday Few times a week Few times a week
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Bicycling
371
90
Few times a week
Bicycling
372
90
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
373eeing, Art, Entertainment 374eeing, Art, Entertainment 375eeing, Art, Entertainment 376
60 60 40 50
Everyday Few times a week Few times a week 2-3 times a month
Walking/Rolling Bicycling Walking/Rolling Bicycling
377eeing, Art, Entertainment
30
2-3 times a month
Walking/Rolling
378 Exercise, Fitness 379eeing, Art, Entertainment 380eeing, Art, Entertainment 381 Exercise, Fitness
45 60 90 60
First visit Everyday Few times a week First visit
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Running Walking/Rolling
382eeing, Art, Entertainment
90
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
383eeing, Art, Entertainment
60
Once per month
Walking/Rolling
384eeing, Art, Entertainment
90
Few times a week
Bicycling
385
60
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
386
60
First visit
Walking/Rolling
387 388eeing, Art, Entertainment
120 60
Few times a week 2-3 times a month
Running
389
45
Few times a week
Running
60 60 60 30 20 75
First visit First visit First visit First visit Everyday Everyday
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Running
$ $ $
15 15 15
60
Everyday
Running
$
12
Wedge
30-45
Few times a week Few times a week Once per month 2-3 times a month A few times per year First visit First visit
$
10
Summit
$ $ $
150 50 25
Liberty Café ? food truck
390 391 392 393 394 395
Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness Exercise, Fitness
396 397eeing, Art, Entertainment 398 399 Exercise, Fitness 400 401 Exercise, Fitness 402 Bidding of elders 403
45 20 30 90 all day
404 405 Exercise, Fitness 406 407 408
10 30 60 20
Kayaking
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Bicycling Walking/Rolling Bicycling Walking/Rolling Skating cation, connectio Walking/Rolling
2-3 times a month
Bicycling
Few times a week 2-3 times a month First visit A few times per year
Bicycling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
$
10
$
50
$
40
Riot
White Duck
$
50 ole Foods, Merrimon
?
$
Hopi Grocery
25
?
409
60
Once per month
Running
410 411 412
50 100 70
Everyday First visit Few times a week
Running Walking/Rolling Running
413 Exercise, Fitness
30
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
414
30
First visit
Bicycling
415eeing, Art, Entertainment
60
Few times a week
Bicycling
$
22
416
60
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
$
10
417eeing, Art, Entertainment
60
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
$
30 Summit and lunch
418
40
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438
30 145
Few times a week Everyday
Walking/Rolling
90 30-45 60 45 22 1.15-2.0 hrs
Few times a week Few times a week Few times a week Few times a week
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Running Running Running Walking/Rolling
60
Few times a week Everyday Few times a week
45 60 30 30-45 45 20 90
Everyday Everyday Few times a week Few times a week Few times a week First visit Few times a week
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
439
45
2-3 times a month
Walking/Rolling
440
45
2-3 times a month
Bicycling
441
45
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
442
60
Everyday
Running
Bicycling
?
$
$
5 psy Wagon Espresso
$
4
100 ole Foods, Merrimon
Running
One wheel Le Bon
Running Walking/Rolling
$
$
5 ger's Revenge/Luella's
27
CVS
443
45
Everyday
Bicycling
444 445 446
60 40
Everyday Few times a week
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
447
60
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
448 ng, Shopping, Errands
60
2-3 times a month
Bicycling
449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456
40 45 35 45 40 45 90
Few times a week Few times a week Few times a week 2-3 times a month Few times a week Few times a week Few times a week Few times a week
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
457
40
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
Everyday Everyday Everyday
Walking/Rolling
30 45-60
461
120
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
462
120
463 464 465
60 60 60
Few times a week Few times a week Few times a week
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
466 ng, Shopping, Errands
60
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
Socializing
467 468
65 40
Everyday Everyday
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
Biking
469
50
First visit
Walking/Rolling
470
60
Everyday
Running
471
60
472
60
First visit
Walking/Rolling
473
60
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
474 475 476
60 90 43
Few times a week Few times a week Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
477
30
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
Running
478 479 480
20 45 60
Everyday Everyday Everyday
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
Dogwalking Birding
458 459 460eeing, Art, Entertainment
$
10
YoLo
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
running
Bicycling $
?
?
Running ?
coffee
er store Montford, Shell
Tailgate Market
20 UNCA Bookstore
481
120
Everyday
482 483 484 485
45 40 35 90
Few times a week Few times a week Everyday Few times a week
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Running
486
10
Once per month
Walking/Rolling
487eeing, Art, Entertainment 488 489 490 491 Exercise, Fitness
30 30 30 60 30
Few times a week Few times a week 2-3 times a month Few times a week Few times a week
Walking/Rolling Running Running
492
35
2-3 times a month
Walking/Rolling
493eeing, Art, Entertainment
60
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
494 495 496 497 498
70 45 30 30 50
Few times a week Few times a week 2-3 times a month Few times a week Everyday
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Running Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
60
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
Running
500eeing, Art, Entertainment
40-60
First visit
Running
Biking
501eeing, Art, Entertainment
60
First visit
Bicycling
35-40
Few times a week
Running
503eeing, Art, Entertainment
45
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
504 Exercise, Fitness
40
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
505eeing, Art, Entertainment 506
60 30
Everyday 2-3 times a month
Walking/Rolling
507 Exercise, Fitness
60
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
508 509 510 511 512
120 30 105
Few times a week Few times a week Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
30
Few times a week
513
50
Few times a week
514 515 516 517 518
45 120 45 45
Few times a week 2-3 times a month Everyday Few times a week First visit
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
519
20
Few times a week
Bicycling
Commuting
499
502
Socializing Dogwalking $
30
CFA
Biking Biking $
50
Harris Teeter
$
20
?
Walking/Rolling
Biking
Running
$
20
5 Guys
Walking/Rolling
Bicycling
? Running
coffee
520 521 522 523 524 525 526 Exercise, Fitness 527 528 Exercise, Fitness 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537
45-60
Few times a week
Walking/Rolling
60 45
2-3 times a month First visit Few times a week Few times a week Everyday Few times a week Everyday Few times a week Everyday Few times a week Everyday Everyday Everyday
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
45-50 75 30 60 30
Socializing Socializing
60 30 90 20-25 30 60 40 75
Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Bicycling Running Bicycling Running Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling Walking/Rolling
2-3 times a month Everyday Few times a week
Running Walking/Rolling
538
60
Few times a week
Running
539
75
Everyday
Walking/Rolling
540
60
Few times a week
Running
541 542 543 544 545
60
First visit
Running
$
15
Hi Five
$
10
Hi Five
Running
Running
#
$Bikes (Fill)
Where (Fill)
$Other (Fill)
Where (Fill)
15. Living 16. Perm Res: Status (Choice) City (Fill)
Perm Res: State (Fill)
PermRes: Zip (Fill) 28804
Visit: Nights (Fill)
V1. Visit: Trail Importance (Choice)
V2. Visit: Spending (Fill)
V3. Visit: Stay (Choice)
1 2
Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville
NC NC
3
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
4 5
Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville
NC NC
6
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
7 8
Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville
NC NC
28804 28801
9
Visitor
Palo Alto
CA
94306
Not Important
200
W / Friend, Relative
10
Visitor
Lyons
CO
80540
Not Important
2000
Motel / Hotel
11
Visitor
Long Prairie
MN
Not Important
200
W / Friend, Relative
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
13
Perm Resident
Asheville
14 15 16 17 18 19
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Seas Resident Perm Resident
Woodfin Asheville Asheville Asheville Santiago, Chile Asheville
NC NC NC NC
28804 28804
NC
28803
20
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
21
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28804
22
Seas Resident
Beverly
MA
1915
23 24 25 26 27 28
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident
Buncombe Co Asheville Asheville Asheville Asheville
NC NC NC NC
29
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
30
Visitor
31
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28804
32 33
Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville
NC NC
28801 28806
34
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
35
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
12
$
25
x
garage sales
Visit: Stay Other (Fill)
17. Safety (Fill)
Signage (Fill)
Maintenance (Fill)
x
x
x x
28801 28801 x
x
x x
Very Important
3000
W / Friend, Relativ
15
x
x
36
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
38
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
39
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
40
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
Em
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
42 43
Seas Resident
Naples
FL
44
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
45
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
46
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
47 48 49 50 51 52
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident
Fairview Asheville Asheville Asheville Asheville Weaverville
NC NC NC NC NC NC
53
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
54
Perm Resident
Weaverville
NC
28787
55 56
Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville
NC NC
28801
57
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28804
58 59 60 61
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville Asheville Asheville
NC NC NC NC
28804 28804
62
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
63
Perm Resident
Candler
NC
64
Perm Resident
Swannanoa
NC
65 66
Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville
NC NC
67
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
68
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
69
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
70
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
71
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
72
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
37
$
17
garage sale
x x 28801
x 28732 28804
x
28804 28787
x
x
x
28801
73 74
Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville
NC NC
28801
75
Perm Resident
76 77 78 79 80 81
x
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Visitor Perm Resident Visitor
Asheville Asheville Asheville
NC NC NC
28801 28801 28802
Asheville
NC
82
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
83
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
84
Seas Resident
Atlanta
85 86
Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville
NC NC
87
Perm Resident
Fairview
NC
88 89
Perm Resident Perm Resident
Alexander Asheville
NC NC
90
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
91
Visitor
Chapel Hill
NC
92
Perm Resident
Candler
NC
28715
93
Perm Resident Southside Aville
NC
28801
94
Perm Resident
Aville
NC
28806
95
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
96 97
Visitor Visitor
Chapel Hill Austin
NC TX
27516 78701
98
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
99
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
100
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
101
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28804
102
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28803
103
Visitor
104
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
105
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
5
Very Important
5000
1
Not Important
20
nB / Short Term Rental W / Friend, Relative
28801 x x 28801
28801 x
IL
x
x 2 ?
omewhat Importa omewhat Importa
750 1000
nB / Short Term Rental
x Hostel
x
x
Not Important
400
Campground
x x x
106
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
107
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
108
Perm Resident
Leicester
NC
28806
109
Visitor
Portland
OR
97227
110
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
111
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
112
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
113 114 115
Visitor Atlanta Seas Resident Minneapolis Perm Resident sheville (downtow
GA MN NC
30308 55405 28801
116
Visitor
Ithaca
NY
14850
117
Visitor
Houston
TX
77023
118
Visitor
Houston
TX
77023
119
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
120
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
121
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
122
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
123
Seas Resident
Jupiter
FL
33477
124
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
125
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28803
126
Visitor
Matthews
NC
28104
127
Visitor
Leicester
NC
28806
128 129 130 131 132 133 134
Visitor Visitor Perm Resident
Mt Airy Mt Airy
MD MD
Visitor Perm Resident Perm Resident
Washington Asheville Asheville
DC NC NC
21771 21771 28807 28804 20003 28801 28801
135
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
10
omewhat Importa
2000
nB / Short Term Rental
x
Not Important
300
nB / Short Term Rental
x
Somewhat Importa
unknown
W / Friend, Relative
3
omewhat Importa
500
nB / Short Term Rental
x
3
omewhat Importa
500
nB / Short Term Rental
x x
x
x
?
Very Important
Somewhat Importa Somewhat Importa
1
Not Important
60
700 500
Motel / Hotel Motel / Hotel
300
Motel / Hotel
x x
x x x x
x
136
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
137
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28803
138
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
139
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
140 141
Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville
NC NC
28806 28806
142
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
143 144
Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville
NC NC
28806 28805
145
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
Visitor Perm Resident Visitor
Ervine Asheville Clearwater
CA NC FL
92618 28803 33601
149
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28805
150
Perm Resident
Ashville
NC
28806
151
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28805
152
Visitor
Franklenton
NC
27525
153
Perm Resident
Leicester
NC
28806
154
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
155 156 157
Visitor Visitor Perm Resident
Durham Baltimore Asheville
NC MD NC
27701 21794 28805
158
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
159 160
Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville
NC NC
28803 ?
161
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
162
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
163
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
164
Perm Resident
Arden
NC
28704
165
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28807
166
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28804
167
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
146 147 148
?
be kayak rental for
x
x
3
Not Important
6
300
Motel / Hotel
2700
Motel / Hotel
x
Not Important
100
W / Friend, Relative
x
2
Not Important Not Important
500 500
nB / Short Term Rental Motel / Hotel x
x
x
168
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
x
169 170
Perm Resident Visitor
Asheville
NC IL
28805
171
Perm Resident
Candler
NC
28715
172
Perm Resident
Perm + visitor
?
?
173
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
174
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
175
Perm Resident
Woodfin
NC
28804
176
Visitor
Durham
NC
27517
177
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28803
178
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28805
179
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28805
180
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
?
181
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28805
182
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28803
183
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
184
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28803
185
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
?
187
Visitor
Charlottesville
VA
22930
0
Not Important
50
188 189
Perm Resident Visitor
Weaverville Spartenburg
NC SC
28787 29303
0
Very Important
30
190
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28803
191
Visitor
Greensboro
NC
27401
Not Important
200
192
Visitor
Charlotte/SC ?
29710
Not Important
500-600
Very Important
2000
nB / Short Term Rental
Not Important
x x
3
omewhat Importa
500
nB / Short Term Rental x
x
x
x
x
186
193 194
Perm Resident Asheville Perm Resident Woodfin/Alexande
NC NC
28803 28804
W / Friend, Relative nB / Short Term Rental
195 196
Visitor Perm Resident
New York Burnsville
NY NC
14741 28714
197
Perm Resident
Burnsville
NC
28715
198
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28803
199
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28803
200 201 202 203 204
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Seas Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville Candler Dunedin Asheville
NC NC NC FL NC
28803 28806 28715 34698 38801
205
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
206
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
207
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
208
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28804
209
Perm Resident
Leicester
NC
28748
210 211
Seas Resident Seas Resident
Asheville Chicago
NC IL
28801 60657
212
Visitor
Winston Salem
NC
27104
213
Perm Resident
214
Perm Resident
Fairview
NC
28730
215 216 217 218 219 220
Perm Resident Perm Resident Seas Resident Seas Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Fairview Asheville Port ? Asheville Asheville
NC NC NC FL NC NC
28806 28803
221
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28704
222 223
Perm Resident Perm Resident
Woodfin Candler
NC NC
28804
224
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
2880?
225 226 227 228 229
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Candler Asheville Woodfin Weaverville
NC NC NC NC NC
28806 28715 28806 28804 28787
230
Visitor
Raleigh
NC
27610
NC NC
27519 27604
NC NC
28801 28791
231 232 233 234 235
Not Important
30-100
Campground
x x
x
x 4
omewhat Importa
2000
nB / Short Term Rental
x
28805
Visitor Cary Visitor Raleigh Visitor Perm Resident Asheville Perm Resident Hendersonville
x Very Important Not Important
33953
owns home
x
x
2 2 1
Very Important
1000
Not Important omewhat Importa omewhat Importa
2000 100 900
nB / Short Term Rental
Motel / Hotel Motel / Hotel
236
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28803
237
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
238
Perm Resident
Leicester
NC
28748
239
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
240
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
241 242
Visitor Perm Resident
New York Asheville
New York NC
243
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
244 245 246
Perm Resident Perm Resident Visitor
Weaverville
NC
Cincinatti
OH
247
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28805
248
Perm Resident
Candler
NC
28715
249 250
Perm Resident Visitor
Wayneville Knoxville
NC TN
28785
251
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
252 253
Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Weaverville
NC NC
254
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
255
Perm Resident
Swanannoa
NC
256
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
257
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274
Perm Resident Visitor Perm Resident Perm Resident Visitor Visitor Visitor Visitor Perm Resident Visitor Perm Resident Perm Resident Visitor Perm Resident Visitor Perm Resident Visitor
Candler Bakersfield Asheville Asheville Lynchburg Brunswick Summerfield Edgewater (?) Asheville Southbury Asheville
NC CA NC NC VA GA NC NJ NC CT NC
28715 93309
28805 6488 28806
Not Important
Louisville Asheville St Louis Asheville
CO NC MO NC FL
80027
Very Important
N/A
W / Friend, Relative
6 wks
Not Important
2000
W / Friend, Relative
15
omewhat Important
3
omewhat Importa
300
nB / Short Term Rental
x 28787
x 3
Not Important
3
Very Important
2
Not Important
10 5
Not Important omewhat Importa Very Important omewhat Importa
Motel / Hotel
500
Campground
28787
28801
28801 24502 31520 27358
2
Motel / Hotel
200 2000 30 1000
van nB / Short Term Rental Motel / Hotel W / Friend, Relative
x x
63119
W / Friend, Relative
x
275
$
200 White water rafting
Visitor
Morehead City
NC
28557
Perm Resident
Oakley
NC
28803
278
Perm Resident
Woodfin
NC
28804
279
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
Visitor Visitor
Chicago, New York Ossining
NY
10520
Somewhat Important Not Important
282
Seas Resident
Hickory
NC
28601
Very Important
283
Perm Resident
Weaverville
NC
28787
284 285
Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville
NC NC
28806 28806
286
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28803
287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294
Candler Perm Resident NC Perm Resident Asheville NC Perm Resident Asheville NC Morgantown Visitor WV Perm Resident Asheville NC Perm Resident mbe-just outside of city Perm Resident Oakley NC Visitor NYC NY
28804 28804 28806 26501 28804
276
6
Not Important
3000-4000
nB / Short Term Rental
277
280 281
maybe
unknown
x x AirBnB / Short Term Rental AirBnB / Short Term Rental seasonal house
x x
x
x
Very Important
2000
28803 10007
4
Not Important
600
nB / Short Term Rental
x
x
x
295
Visitor
Carboro
NC
27510
3
Very Important
300
nB / Short Term Rental
x
296
Visitor
Durham
NC
27707
3
Very Important
300
nB / Short Term Rental
x
297
Visitor
2 months
Very Important
1000
298
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28803
299
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28805
300
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
301 302
Perm Resident Visitor
Lorton
VA
22079
Very Important
1000
303
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28805
304 305
Perm Resident Visitor
Asheville
NC
28804
e-convention traveler
x
Other
3000
x
conversion van
nB / Short Term Rental
x x
Very Important
x
nB / Short Term Rental
x
306
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
307
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28804
308
Perm Resident
Brevard
NC
28712
309
Visitor
Greenville
SC
29605
310
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
311
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28804
312
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28804
313
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28805
314
Perm Resident
315
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
316 317 318
Perm Resident Perm Resident Visitor
Candler Asheville Baltmore
NC NC MD
28804
319
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
320
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28804
321 322
Visitor Perm Resident
Savannah Asheville
GA NC
31302 28806
323
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
324
Perm Resident
Leicester
NC
28806
325 326
Perm Resident Visitor
Asheville Philadelphia
NC PA
28806
327
Perm Resident
Woodfin
NC
28804
328
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28805
329
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
330
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28778
331
Seas Resident
Ormond Beach
FL
32176
332
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
333
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
Very Important
25
not staying overnight
x 21201
Somewhat Importa
Very Important
400
1000
Motel / Hotel
x
x
x
x
28806
x
334 335 336 337 338
Seas Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Seas Resident
Asheville Asheville Asheville Asheville Eaglewood
NC NC NC NC FL
28804 28806 28804 33947
339
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28805
340 341 342 343
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville Woodfin Asheville
NC NC NC NC
28806 28804
344
Perm Resident
Swanannoa
NC
345 346 347
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville Asheville
NC NC NC
28806 28804 28806
348
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28805
349 350 351
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville Asheville
NC NC NC
28806
352
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
353 354
Perm Resident Perm Resident
Woodfin Asheville
NC NC
28804 28806
355
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
356 357
Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville
NC NC
2880? 28803
358
Perm Resident
Fairview
NC
28730
359
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
x
360 361
Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville
NC NC
28803 28806
x
362
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
363
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
Biltmore Forest
NC
28803
364
$
60Clayworks/Odysse Perm Resident
x x
x
x
x
365
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28805
366
Perm Resident
Woodfin
NC
28804
367
Perm Resident
Candler
NC
28715
x
368 369 370
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville Fairview
NC NC NC
28801 28806 28730
371
Perm Resident
Weaverville
NC
28787
372
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
373 374 375 376
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Leicester Asheville Asheville
NC NC NC NC
2880? 28748 28801 28803
377
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
378 379 380 381
Visitor Perm Resident Perm Resident Visitor
? Asheville Asheville Richmond
NC NC VA
28806 28806 28574
382
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28803
383
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
384
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28805
385
Perm Resident
Woodfin
NC
28804
386
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
387 388
Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville
NC NC
28805 28806
389
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
390 391 392 393 394 395
Visitor Visitor Visitor Visitor Perm Resident Perm Resident
Berkeley Berkeley Long Island Asheville Weaverville
CT CA CA NY NC NC
6511 94705 94705 91934 28801 28787
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
397 398 399 400 401 402 403
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Visitor Visitor
Weaverville Haw Creek Fairview Asheville Mars Hill None
404
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
405 406 407 408
Perm Resident Perm Resident Visitor Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville Greenville Alexander
NC NC SC NC
396
$
20
Pisgah Fitness
x x
Not Important
NC NC NC NC NC box in FL but transient CA, mostly transien
300
Motel / Hotel x
3 x
x
x
2 3 3 5
Not Important Not Important Not Important omewhat Importa
500 500 500 100
Motel / Hotel Motel / Hotel Motel / Hotel W / Friend, Relative
28787 28805 28730
x x
28754 93101
28806 28701
?
Very Important Very Important
5000 ?
Silent Reflections in Burnsville Motel / Hotel camping
409
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28803
410 411 412
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Candler Asheville
NC NC NC
28715
413
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
414
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28806
415
Seas Resident
Atlanta
GA
30337
416
Perm Resident
Weaverville
NC
28787
417
Perm Resident
Weaverville
NC
28787
418
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438
Perm Resident Perm Resident
Fairview Asheville
NC NC
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
Perm Resident Asheville, Woodfin Perm Resident Asheville Perm Resident Asheville Perm Resident Asheville Perm Resident Asheville Seas Resident Louisville Visitor Asheville Perm Resident Asheville Perm Resident Asheville Perm Resident Asheville Perm Resident Asheville Perm Resident Asheville Visitor Perm Resident Asheville
NC NC NC NC NC KY NC NC NC NC NC NC VA NC
439
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
440
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
441
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
442
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
x
x
28804 28804 28801 40056
x
Very Important
W / Friend, Relative
28804 28804
9
Not Important
?
?
28804 28804
x x
443
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
444 445 446
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville Asheville
NC NC NC
28804
447
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28715
448
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28804
449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville Asheville Asheville Asheville Asheville Asheville Asheville
NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
457
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
458 459 460
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville Asheville
NC NC NC
461
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
462
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
463 464 465
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville Asheville
NC NC NC
28804 28801
466
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
467 468
Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville
NC NC
469
Visitor
New York
NY
470
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
471
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
472
Perm Resident
Surf City
NC
28445
473
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
474 475 476
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville Candler
NC NC NC
28801 and 28804 28803 28715
477
Visitor
Tampa
FL
34601
478 479 480
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28804
Asheville
NC
x
x
x x
28801
28801
x
x x x x
28801 s of moving; don't know zip
Not Important
500
x
28801 x 250 x
14
Very Important
2500
nB / Short Term Rental
481
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
482 483 484 485
Perm Resident Perm Resident Seas Resident Perm Resident
Woodfin Asheville Coral Gables Weavervile
NC NC FL NC
28804 28804 33134 28787
486
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28804
487 488 489 490 491
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville Asheville Weaverville Asheville
NC NC NC NC NC
492
Seas Resident
Naples
FL
34109
493
Perm Resident 54 Albemarle Rd
NC
28801
494 495 496 497 498
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident
Asheville Asheville Weaverville Asheville Asheville
NC NC NC NC NC
28801 28787 28801
499
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
Visitor
Kansas City
MO
501
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
502
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
503
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
504
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
Visitor Perm Resident
? Fairview
NC
28730
507
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28804
508 509 510 511 512
Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident
Fairview Weaverville Asheville Asheville Asheville
NC NC NC NC NC
28730 28787
513
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
514 515 516 517 518
Perm Resident Asheville Perm Resident Asheville Perm Resident Asheville Seas Resident Hyannis/Miami (?) Visitor Boston
NC NC NC
28804 28801
519
Perm Resident
NC
500 $
505 506
160
Flying Bike
$
44
gas
Asheville
x
x x
28804 28787
x Very Important
x x
8
7
MA
x
1000-2000 (6 peoplnB / Short Term Rental
Not Important
1000
W / Friend, Relative
28801 28801
x x x 3
Not Important
1000
nB / Short Term Rental
520
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537
Perm Resident Visitor Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Seas Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident Visitor Perm Resident Perm Resident Perm Resident
Weaverville Del Ray Asheville Asheville Asheville Asheville Asheville Asheville London Asheville Asheville Asheville Weaverville NYC Asheville Asheville Asheville
NC FL NC NC NC NC NC NC
538
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
539
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28801
540
Perm Resident
Asheville
NC
28894
541 542 543 544 545
Visitor
Seattle
WA
98008
$
10
Shell station
NC NC NC NC NY NC NC NC
28787 14
Not Important
5k-6k
Other x
28804 28801 28804 Very Important
3000
W / Friend, Relative
Very Important
3000
nB / Short Term Rental
28804 28804 28787
x 6
28804 28804
x x
8
Not Important
2500-3000
Other
B&B
#
Services (Fill)
1 2
x x
Restrooms (Fill)
Parking (Fill)
Lodging (Fill)
Trail (Fill)
x
Art (Fill)
Picnic (Fill)
Special (Fill)
x
Lighting (Fill) x
x
4 5
x
6
x
7 8 x
x
10 11
x
12
x
13
x
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
x
x
23 24 25 26 27 28
x
x
x
x
x
Roots are easy to trip over
No No
1 2
45 41
No
1
61
No No
1 1
54 37
No
1
67
No Yes
1 2
31 60
No
2
27
No
2
62
No
2
66
No
3
43
No
2
78
No No No No No No
1 2 1 3 1 1
63 27 72 46 43 66
No
1
41
cracks up to Merrimon
No
1
76
Separate bike and walk lanes, better lighting, more things to do along trail
No
1
21
No No No No
2 1 1 3 3
33 60 68 43 57
No
1
45
No
1
37
No
2
71
1 1
63 70
No
1
26
No
3
40
Merrimon concerns (?), N/S connection (?) Make it longer Emergency panic button Maintenance on bike lane, don't overdo stop signs, need speed limits More trail Connect to Riverside More shade, art/historical features Remove invasive/exotic plants Removal of kudzu, access to places for people to walk and bike
E-Device Type (Fill)
Separate bike and walk trails x x
x
x
x
x x
31 32 33 34
35
20. You - Age (Fill)
x
29 30
19. # In Group (Fill)
Bus stops More trails, trucks don't care on Riverside bike lanes
21 22
18. E-Device (Choice)
Benches for resting; I love this trail, nice to have near house More shade, longer trail More! Kudzu killing trees Trash cans
x
x
x
Specific Concern or Improvements
x
3
9
Other (Fill)
x
x
Connection to other trails. Crosswalk improvement at bottom of Founders Dr Connections to other trails Cyclists riding side by side; folks with mental health issues (guy yelling @ people w/masks) Need trash cans for dog poop Road maintenance Beaucatcher Trails, please! And parking in future, please! Expand ? River to Reed Creek Fewer pets; clear guidelines about leash length and pets approaching people
No Yes
Bike
36
Not so close to road More garbage cans; bathrooms = age discrimination More length; Enforce leash Daughter to bike @ Hanger Hall; homeless folks not acting ? Amboy, feeling safe biking, pond runoff Emergency thing out of order; have seen bears ??? Gets people ??
No
1
50
No
1
50
No
2
60
No
2
40
No
2
24
No
1
57
1
72
1
38
No
2
70
No
2
62
No No No No No No
10 1 10 4 3 2
46 35 28 34 ? 73
No
1
72
No
2
70
No No
2 2
62 55
No
1
50
No No No
1 1 1 1
34 30 75 69
Trash can availability
No
1
58
63
Continue trail up Riverside
No
1
65
64
Dark with trees on portion of trail
No
1
63
No No
1 3
58 49
No
3
64
No
1
70
3
52
1
62
1
45
2
51
37 38 39 40
x x
x
x
Em 42 43 44
x
45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52
x Tree roots causing bumping trail Longer
x x x x
x More connections- this would be a great use of my tax dollars More bike trails, any place to ride bike, city streets are not wide enough More trails; I bike occasionaly
53 54 55 56
x
57
x
58 59 60 61
x
62
x
65 66
x
x
More trail, extensions, mile markers, 1/2 mile markers Longer/more beautiful ?, easy ? ? None- likes it all
x
x
67 68 69
Connection, longer trails, rails to trails, emergency buttons Extend northward; rails to trails along River Rd; Replace bridge at Amboy Clarify button usage at corner; mud/drainage at Carrier Park
x
x
Extend to Woodfin Extensions; make it safer on Meadow Rd (traffic) Parking to walk 4 mile loop?? Bridge very dangerous
Yes
x
70
x
Extend from Elizabeth; trail remediation
71
x
Ultimately want all greenways to connect; would like to see Amboy connect to Biltmore Village
Yes
Connect to downtown
No
72
Bike
Bike
73 74
Lanes for walkers and cyclists x More greenways - Hominy Ck by waste transfer station
75 76 77 78 79 80 81
x
x x
x x Extend it to Broadway to Riverside x
83
x Tackle kudzu, clean up waterway
x
87 88 89
Bike lanes, dedicated bike facility x
x
91 92
93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100
x
101 102
x (water)
103
x (water)
104 105
x
x
No
1
53
1 1 2 1 2 2
51 74 24 53 78 66
1
58
2
53
No
2
59
No No
1 1
50 64
No
1
37
1 1
33 44
No
1
50
No
2
didn't say
No
2
60
1
47
No
1
42
No
1
50
No
2 2
30 21
No
1
66
Bike
No
No Yes Mentally ill confrontation, bears, more trees and shade dogs at Botanical Gardens well behaved More pullouts, more benches; Homeless/transients, needles; bridge is deterant Reported a ? Didn't know how to tell location. Location markers! For 91 all boxes + mile markers More native species along trail; cleaner river; bridge is sketch Trash cans for dog waste; near Amboy bridge ??? Safe trail for any road
90
42 68
Yes
84 85 86
2 1
No Yes No No No No
x x
82
No No
Yes
Bike
Bike
?
Trail map, water fountain Have alternate sports courts/field even flat walls. Amboy Bridge improve safety Poop! Lame (?) people pick up their dog's poop! More trails!
No
1
54
No
1
18
Trail courtesy
No
2
72
No
2
33
No
2
35
No
2
67
No
1
55
water stops, off road trails (natural surface) more bathrooms and signs to bathrooms; shade; water along trail Improve crossing at Amboy Bridge - make it safer Walk lanes for walking; speed bumps?
106
Drainage; more pet waste recepticals; improve crossing at Amboy Bridge
No
2
44
107
More miles of trails that are connected; a couple patches are rough; Amboy Bridge unsafe; would be nice to have other bike connection to FBR GW
No
1
64
108
some playground equipment; more shade
No
3
35
No
2
37
No
2
39
2
55
No
2
29
No No No
2 1 1
22 63 25
No
1
63
No
2
42
No
2
35
No
2
34
No
3
46
No
1
?
No
2
52
Better crossing on Amboy Bridge
No
2
57
124
More trash cans; crossing bridge is too dangerous
No
2
36
125
Trash is overflowing; "poop stink" at survey site, more shade/shelter
No
1
50
1
24
No
2
29
No No No No No No No
4 1 1 1 2 4(?) 1
45 51 25 60 50s 51 43
No
1
42
109 110 111 112 113 114 115
x (rest area) x
x
Some kind of concessions (drinks?) more benches; snacks/water bathrrooms, water fountains w/dog access
x
116
x
More paths across road Make it longer! More trail; no more pollution in river
117 118 119 120 121 122 123
126
127
x x
More signage on n. end Only dangerous spot notcied was RR crossing More connectivity Amboy connect ?? Safety too. Have a loop Better access right on greenway and commerce; better views of river
x
Less pollen water
x
More public restrooms, bridge crossing too dangerous, need clean up boxes, better bike lanes, go all the way to Biltmore, more connections, sometimes unexpected homeless camps, volley ball beach area, grill. Water fountain
128 129 130 131 132 133 134
x
135
x
Mile markers Mile markers More trails, bridge is sketchy More access; bridge at Amboy Signage from downtown Pedestrian at bridge Mile markers Extend trail, widen Amboy Bridge, Mile Markers
136 137 138
x
x
139 140 141
x
x x
x
142
x
143 144
x
145 146 147 148
x
x
149
x
150
x
x
Pocket Map/Guide Completion of dirt areas, widen shoulders Trash cans More places to put dog poop, more trees for shade
x Motivational signs More trails, make Amboy Bridge safer Trash cans, doggie bags Trash cans, more trails Bridge is too narrow for stroller and dog; shade - very exposed None yet - first time Playground Trash cans, would visit shops but looks run down - not sure what's what Transient housing Bike access from E Aville, bike/walk guide
151 152
No
1
36
No
1
40
No
1
34
No
2
61
No No
1 1
50 32
No
1
31
No No
1 1
50 66
No
2
34
No No Yes
1 2 2
55 56 64
No
1
78
No
1
44
No
1
70s
Yes
2
63
153
Educating users so diff users don't collide; more greenways
No
2
55
154
Bridge across Amboy is dangerous; under bridge stinks; needs better signage under Riverside for parking; protected lanes for roads and peds. Other things but unable to read (CB)
No
1
67
No No No
1 2
30 42 43
No
1
45
No No
2 2
58 40
No
1
?
No
2
?
No
2
36
No
2
38
No
1
53
No
2
40
No
1
69
155 156 157
x
Poop cans Pedestrian way across Amboy bridge; connect to Biltmore Village
158 159 160
161
Trash/poop cans
x
162 163 164
x x x
165 166 167
Less grass, more pollinator plantings, and more tree conservation
x
More bathrooms and ones that open early Keep it going; make it longer…to Woodfin Concerns for how wildlife is managed, safety for wildlife. More water fountains
168
x
169 170
x
Map underneath bridge is flipped around. Connect Carrier other than crossing bridge. Dog water spigot More trash cans
No
1
31
No No
3 2
44 30
171
Bridge is a little rough. Would like to get to Hominy Ck from Candler. Turned around at Amboy Bridge because didn't want to go over on roller blades and w/stroller
No
2
40
172
"You are here" signs; more shade
No
5
?
No
1
?
1
?
No
2
80
No
4
30
Need signs saying "keep to right" Fix Amboy Bridge! Longer out Riverside Dr
173 174
Some cyclists come from behind too fast. Amboy Bridge is problem w/glass and being too narrow
175
176 177
More shade, didn't want to cross Amboy Bridge. Grow trees fast!
No
3
44
178
More greenways, more street sweeping, more ?? Mellowdrome
No
1
61
No
2
34
179
180
x
181 182 183 184 185
x
Bridge across to Carrier - couldn't cross; connecting more peds in E Avel Add trailhead parking to Reed Ck by Botanical Gardens; art festivals, gatherings Amboy Bridge sucks w/kids; more greenway Keep extending Fix Amboy Rd Bridge, gravel path underneath bridge Connection and amount Expand future (?) on river. Patton bridge parking unsafe because of homeless
? 2
?
3
?
1
?
2
?
1
?
No
2
29
No No
2 2
60 28
No
2
45
No
2
78
No
2
32
No No
1 1
38 41
186 More views on section they're walking External connectivity
187 188 189
More trails that are connected; more a higher priority than over built/?; more parking at Hominy Ck Park area
190 191 192
x
193 194
x
More treess on sidewalks by road (Riverside)
195 196
More river access Connectivity All greenways connected w/bike lanes or bike crossing on Amboy More garbage cans Need more signs, directions, maps, to local businesses Safety for a woman alone Fruit trees, map, ? And ? Extending Extending trail
197 198
x
199 200 201 202 203 204
x x x x x
More dedicated bike lanes; educate about how to use trails w/others
205 206
x
x Noise from bridge; extend connect to Carrier Park; call boxes Shade trees; extended
207 208
x
Consider ped crossing over river; pave trail under Amboy Rd bridge; functional water fountains
209 210 211
Longer x
213 214
More miles of trails Extended and connected Homeless ?? Improved Dog waste stations x Cameras for safety Extend trail; more trash cans; Talk to N/S RR about replacing bridge to help w/flooding Expand trail Expand trail, trash cans Shade trees, more trails connected Mile makers, map is backwards
221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229
x
x
x x
x
230 231 232 233 234 235
2 2
27 50
No
2
65
No
2
61
No
2
?
No No No No No
2 2 1 2 1
? 45 54 72 43
No
2
51
No
1
52
No
1
62
No
1
39
No
2
49
No No
1 1
66
3
parent
3
37
No
1
71
No No No No No No
1 1 1 2 2 1
46 52 51 mid 60s 66 45
No
1
76
No No
2 2
51 66
No
2
49 61 70
No
1 1 1 1 2
No
2
27
No No No No No
`2 1 1 1 4
40s 40 35 38 56
Disoriented on where to go, a map will be helpful Food truck, shade trees
212
215 216 217 218 219 220
No No
x
x
Safety at night Connectivity needs to improve Extend trail Safe ped crossing on Amboy Bridge, more unpaved trails, water Extend More flowers More trails Longer
No No
68
More trails, esp to Bilmore Village; trash near campers ? To have exercise stations; more shade Water; longer distance, connect to more trails Mile makers every 1/2 mile Want to see West side of FBRT finished; improve bridge crossing at Amboy Shade structures Longer Low speed limits on roads; finish trail; more shade; portajohns/restrooms at ends; build new bridge Longer trails; access over bridge
236 237 238
x
239 240 241 242 243
x
244 245 246
x x Complete trail connections thru KC Park; cycle track continue along Swannanoa River Rd to E Aville
247
Better way for bikes to cross Amboy Bridge; connection to Biltmore Village Amboy Bridge
248 249 250 251
x
252 253
x
255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274
x x
1
50
No
2
64
No
1
26
No
1
55
No
1
46
No
2 1
40 70
2
69
Yes No
One wheel
2 1 2
64 47 68
Yes
E Bike
2
42
1
67
2 2
72 62
2
32
No
1 2
27 7
Yes
1
67
No
1
68
No
3
50
3
40
2 5 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 4 1 2 2 1 1 1 2
33 56 61 33 22 32 59 34 64 64 65 56 37 69 65 54 62
No Yes
Connect the bridge at Carrier, widening bridge at Amboy x
254
No
x
River access; plant shade trees White fine p[ea gravel as the trail or alongside for horses; more connection Put a maze in - like a corn maze for children Water for dogs; trees Extensions: Biltmore, N Aville, maintain green space Expand greenway Longer More shade-it's very hot Shade trees
x
food Amboy Water for boys Dirt trails Ped bridge at Amboy Maps Plant allergy ???; Amboy Bridge
x Lengthened and connected
No
axfoot/Assist bike
275
277
x
278
x
x
x
282 283 284 285 286
More shade trees; gravel alongside; better access fo restrooms; did not want to answer other questions ? Trail (workers)
2
71
2
32
No
2 2
49 59
No
1
71
No
1
63
1 2
31 72
1
44
No No
2 1 1 3 1 1 1 4
53 39 50 54 44 53 28 48
No
4
26
No
4
27
No
1
30
No
3
39
No
4
39
No
2
65
No
1 2
67 57
No
1
62
2 1
57 36
No
Tree buffer b/t trail and road Water stop; shelter from sun Cut limbs; connect Lyman to French Broad River Park Marked signs (right, left); education on how to use trail More trees b/t road and trail Connect existing greenways More workout stations - like at Hominy; rubber path; softer asphalt for joints dog litter Connectivity
x More greenway Homeless support
296 297 x
299
300
x
301 302
x
303 304 305
70
x
295
298
1
Connection from RAD to Carrier; wider bridge at Amboy; waste
279
287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294
45
Bike lane ends before Broadway; cars courteous but ? For more bike lane; anxiety crossing Amboy Bridge
276
280 281
4
x x
Need maps; railroad trax needs improve Hate railroad trax crossing to get here; small maps to pickup Mile markers Ramps for biking, jumping; fast bikes on trails feel dangerous Longer, better Closer bathrooms to trail and water; Amboy-way too risky fro pedestrians, runners, walkers; more waste receptacles and more frequent pick up; curbing b/t protected bike lane and car lane doesn't seem sufficient to keep cars from bike lane No cracks, roots, cleanliness Safety w/Carrier Park restrooms; Amboy Bridge bike&ped fatalities; Carrier Park GW need to be smoothed out Bathroom and water availability Bathroom open water
Sidewalk from Boat Park to connect to trail would be nice for trail to loop city Keep connecting, expand into more neighborhoods Keep expanding, connect more communities
306 307 308 309
No
9
66
No
9
67
No
9
64
No
9
71
No
9
65
No
9
72
2
70s
x
Keep expanding Keep expanding, connect more communities Keep expanding, connect more communities More trash cans, dog waste stations Less trash along river
1
39
1
64
2 1 4
32 68 36
1
35
3
39
No No
1 1
55 31
Need signs "keep dogs on leash"; sewage smell near White Duck and water quality
No
1
43
Would like to skate entire length; connection expedite bridge work
No
1
51
1 3
42 53
No
2
37
No
1
65
2
45
2
37
No
2
65
No
2
40
No
2
65
312 313
No
Want more shade and plants/trees, wildflowers, edibles; do a better job addressing homeless issue; mural under Haywood Bridge has been defaced a few times; ???
315
316 317 318
playground Litter playground Connect to Biltmore; water tunnel on UNCA connection More trails, Carrier Park hard w/trailer
319 320 321 322
x
323
324
x
325 326
X
327
x
More trails, homelessness
328 329 330 331
333
53
Keep expanding, connecting area
311
332
2
x
310
314
No
x
x
Park spaces for kids; naturebased education features Make longer; trash bins; alternative to Amboy Bridge crossing More trails, connectivity, expansion More trail Finish West side and keep doing what you're doing A few security call boxes; wataer for dogs and people; lighting at night for safety Get rid of hom? homeless people sleeping and ? Around (3 nearby)
334 335 336 337 338
Homeless; security boxes x x
No
339 340 341 342 343
Fencing at river More!
x
x
x
x
353 354
x
x
355
356 357
x
358
x
359
x
360 361
x
362
x
363
Used to live in Tuscon; more miles, more separation, more ? Trash cans for dog cleanup More trails More miles of trails; clearer signage about use of diff spaces (bike lane, trail); Amboy Bridge in bad shape and ? Need safe bike passage
x Dangerous Amboy Bridgge-needs a plan; more lighting at night
x
Concerned with individuals following or harrassing Extend Amboy Rd; food on greenway Furthering trail system; clear some greenway for river view Longer! West side; pollinator habitat; Amboy bridge Push carts w/vendors; small playground; open up views of river at places, remove invasives; food and drink closer to greenway
364
367
41
2 1 1
41
No
1
47
No
1 1 1
46
1
36
No No
1 2
50 27
No
1
51
No No
3 1
25 38
No
1
36
No
3
30
No No
2 2
59 42
No
1
50
No
2
35
No
1
58
No
1
80
No
1
47
No
1
45
x
352
366
1 No
348
365
60
Use NC firms; need more greenways So sunny, trees would be great Connectivity Bikes need to go slower or ride on the road;one wheelers (motorized) shouldn't be on greenway (too fast)
x
More trails; flat easy Security at night, can't come alone at night as a female Reminders (?) that need to ? Trail use like traffic use (dotted lines); gathering (?) places like benches, tables
62 71
1 1 1 1
Bridge ?
x
58
40-45 No No
x x
345 346 347
2 1 1 1 1
Bathrooms are open longer distance
x
344
349 350 351
Yes Yes
20 33
40
38
368 369 370
x
x x
371
x
372
x
373 374 375 376
Need more parking; Amboy Bridge is dangerous; need another bridge; need security presence due to homeless Lots of sticks on path after rain Winter/Off-Season Act for roller blader
x Amboy Bridge x x
No No No
1 1 2
62 39 55
No
1
41
No
2
62
No No No No
1 2 1 1
55 42 26 39
377
Outdoor workout bar; restroom signage
No
2
24
378 379 380 381
Safety after dark History of area
No No No No
2 1 1 2
48 32 34 28
More homeless on the trail concerning
No
1
55
No
2
70
No
1
45
No
1
62
No
2
44
No No
1 1
31 ?
No
1
?
No No No No No No
3 3 3 4 adults/2 kids 1 1
34 27 ? ? ? ?
No
1
37
No No
1 1 2 2 4 1 1
40 ? 39 43 45 53 38
x
382 383
x
x
x Homeless west side of river; glass at dog park FBR Park nice but a little overgrown; extend greenways north and south More impervious surface w/infill develop need to continue; more plants, trees
384 385
386 387 388 389
Safety cross over Amboy Bridge Amboy Bridge need safe crossing to dog park -extend Biltmore Village would be great
x
390 391 392 393 394 395
x Extend and connect greenways and spaces/places
396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403
x
x
x x
x x
404 x (casual dining)
x
405 406 407 408
x
x
x
x
Invasives Bike lane cross Amboy Playgrounds
x
No No Didn't know there was access to water-signage to it and more water; more trees planted
No
No No No
51 1 1 1 1
65 49 29 24
409
More parking proximate to downtown; splash area; small playground, zipline; bike air/fix it station
x
410 411 412
more shade more trails Want it to be kept as real & natural as possible; don't want to see more businesses; want to keep some old, historic; more shade & native plants; not more touristy & commercialized; more trash cans &pet waste stations; more features to encourage meeting/gathering; more history exhibits including native people's history; edible plants
413
414
More shade Directional signs at Amboy; ? For new people to navigate & from Carrier Park towards Hominy Ck ? Park More trails; more edible forest installations Bike users on walking path
415
416 417
x
418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438
x
x
1 1 1
30 72 35
No
1
39
No
2
43
No
1
48
No
1
29
2
54 50s
Recycling drop off More of it; River Rd ?
No No
2 1
68 65
No No No No No No No No No No No No Yes
1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
72 65 73 70 27 45 31 62 38 70 64 19 25 43 15 69
?? x More dog stations Work on homeless camps
x More greenways Want the path to go to RAD
No Trail upkeep is clean (?)
One-wheel
No
440
442
No No No
1
439
441
42
No
x
x
3
More dog stations, out of bags; invasive species along Broadway
Longer, more; more dog bags Shade x
No
x
60
Shade
No
3
41
? Garbage receptacle; restrooms
No
1
62
No
1
28
443
x
x
Broadway/Weaver crosswalk signal synchronize No
2
No
1
52 52 64
1
44
1
46
No
1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1
38 34 34 46 60 50 40 36
No
2
No No
1 2 1
40 72 61
No
1
21
Kudzu of wetland; add art walk participating design; more creatvie stormwater reclamationlike Atlanta; lantern making
No
1
More of it!
No No
1 1 2
67 42 58
No
5
74
No No
2 1
50 31
No
1
39
No
1
33
3
70
No
2
56
No
1
41
No No No
2 1 1
45
No
1
66
No No No
1 1 2
40 64 54
444 445 446 447
448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456
x
x x x
Longer connectivity Fix root bumps; longer route Work with city and Homeward Bound to clean up homeless camps More greenway Dog stations - more repair on?? Gardens Connect to UNCA trail system; shade
458 459 460 461
462
466
No
No No No
x
457
463 464 465
Safety & security: homeless, dogs w/o control; contemplating carrying mace Intersections: drivers, peds, cyclists don't watch signals, crosswalks, et Shade Safety phone
x
63
x
x x x
467 468
Get rid of kudzu; water and rest areas unhorned folks Expand Signage for road crossings; Weaver Park ? Tree roots, poison ivy by Merrimon Poisonous bushes, hemlock; take home fold out map w/with lots of street names
x x
469 470 x
471 472
Dark at UNCA and dark at Broadway; bears More trail
473 474 475 476
x
477
x
478 479 480
x x
x
x x
feel safe running Disconnected; length needs to be longer Connected to other trails
50
481
More trails; want to walk to town
482 483 484 485
x
486
x
487 488 489 490 491
x
492
x
x
x x
499
x
503
x
x
x
x
x x
41 56 33 1 1
Asked about signage b/t Magnolia and new section-didn't know it was there until looked at out map
No
2
80
Need overall map for whole GW length ? Carrier Park
No
1
51
No No No No No
1 1 1 2 1
38 74 40 30 81
No
1
1
1
1
2
34
2
56
No
3
77
No
1
38
No
1 1
55 44
1
42
No No No
2 1 2 1 1
70 59 68 63 47
No
1
58
No No No
2 1 1 1 1
75 53 77 76 44
No
1
74
More trails Ice on wooden bridge, water doesn't drain off People passing on E bikes w/out calling out
No No No
Yes
x Concerns about e bikes, esp big groups x
No More nature, less traffic More benches, seating
x
513
x
514 515 516 517 518
x x x
519
No
2 1 2 1 1
x
x
507 508 509 510 511 512
35
Feel fairly safe on GW; concealed carry Access coming off Chestnut; neighborhood signs
504 505 506
1
x
500
x
68 65 77 27
x
x
502
2 1 1 2
Line in middle of greenway Connecting to other greenways
x
x
No No No No Bird friendly plants, nesting boxes
x x
501
74
x
x x
x
1
x
493 494 495 496 497 498
No
natural surface/dirt; asphalt better than concrete; used system more when natural surface More, longer Kudzu maintenance
x
Parking-parked in neighborhood Get NCDOT to make "walk" signals automative
E bike
Beaverdam, Elk Mtn, 1/4 mile stretch would improve safety for bicyclists
520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537
2
68
2 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 3 2 3 1 2 1
74 63 73 75 78 59 70 74 37 35 88 39 83 40 39 27 20
1
34
2
45
No
1
1
No
1
38
No More trails Kudzu, roots! More greenways Bikers/walkers in same space
No No No No
More connectivity Dog park
x x
Widlife
x x
x
No No No No
Separate bike and peds x
x
No
538 539
x
x
540
x
x
541 542 543 544 545
No
More accessible to more people; maps Lighting in Weaver Park; open restrooms more; more call boxes, better functioning
#
You - Sex
You - Travel
#1 - Age
#1 - Sex
#1 - Travel (Choice)
1 2
Female Male
Bicycle/Tag-along Walk/Wheelchair
38
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
3
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
4 5
Male Male
Run/Jog Run/Jog
6
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
7 8
Male Female
Run/Jog 68
Female
9
Male
27
Female
10
Female
11
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
12
Male
Run/Jog
14
Male
Run/Jog
13
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
87
Male
Run/Jog
14 15 16 17 18 19
Male Female Male Female Female Male
27
Male
13
Male
20
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
21
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
22
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
23 24 25 26 27 28
Female Male Female Female Female
Run/Jog Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog Run/Jog
33
Male
Run/Jog
43 46
Male Female
Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog
29
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
30
Male
Run/Jog
31
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
75
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
32 33
Female Male
Walk/Wheelchair Bicycle/Tag-along
34
Female
Run/Jog
35
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
#2 - Age
#2 - Sex
#2 - Travel (Choice)
14
Female
Run/Jog
13
Male
12 35
Male Male
Walk/Wheelchair
Walk/Wheelchair
Run/Jog Run/Jog
Run/Jog
4
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
7
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
#3 - Age
#3 - Sex
#3 - Travel (Choice)
#4 - Age
#4 - Sex
#4 - Travel (Choice)
#5 - Age
#5 - Sex
36
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
37
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
38
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
35
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
39
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
41
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
40
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
24
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
Em
Female
Run/Jog
42 43
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
44
Female
Run/Jog
45
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
46
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
62
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
47 48 49 50 51 52
Male Male Female Female Female Male
Run/Jog Run/Jog Bicycle/Tag-along Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair
34 5 72
Male Male Female
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair
53
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
54
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
70
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
55 56
Female Male
Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog
63 ?
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
57
Male
Run/Jog
58 59 60 61
Female Female Male Female
Run/Jog Walk/Wheelchair Bicycle/Tag-along Walk/Wheelchair
62
Male
63
Female
Run/Jog
64
Female
Run/Jog
65 66
Male Male
Run/Jog Run/Jog
?
?
67
Male
Run/Jog
?
?
68
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
69
Female
Run/Jog
?
?
70
Male
Run/Jog
71
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
72
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
9
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
6 8
Female Male
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair
71
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
73 74
Male Female
Bicycle/Tag-along Run/Jog
2
Male
75
Male
Run/Jog
76 77 78 79 80 81
Female Male Female Female Male Female
Walk/Wheelchair Bicycle/Tag-along Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair
82
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
83
Female
84
Bicycle/Tag-along
14 months
Non-Binary
? 68
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
Bicycle/Tag-along
61
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
59
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
85 86
Male Male
Run/Jog Run/Jog
87
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
88 89
Male Male
Run/Jog Bicycle/Tag-along
90
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
91
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
55
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
92
Female
48
Male
93
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
94
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
95
Female
96 97
Male Female
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair
34 20
Female Male
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair
98
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
99
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
100
Male
Run/Jog
101
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
67
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
102
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
15
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
103
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
30
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
104
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
105
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
Stroller/Other Dependent
106
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
?
107
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
108
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
35
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
109
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
39
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
110
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
52
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
111
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
58
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
112
Female
Other Independen
29
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
113 114 115
Female Female Female
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair
24
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
116
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
117
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
118
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
119
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
6 months
Male
Stroller/Other Dependent
120
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
11
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
121
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
122
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
72
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
123
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
60
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
124
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
35
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
125
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
126
Male
Run/Jog
127
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
23
Female
Run/Jog
128 129 130 131 132 133 134
Female Female Male Male Female Male Female
Run/Jog
?
Run/Jog Bicycle/Tag-along Walk/Wheelchair Bicycle/Tag-along Run/Jog
50s
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
135
Male
Run/Jog
6
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
?
11
Bicycle/Tag-along
136
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
137
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
138
Female
Run/Jog
139
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
140 141
Male Female
Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog
142
Male
Run/Jog
143 144
Female Female
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair
145
Female
146 147 148
60
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
Walk/Wheelchair
35
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
Male Male Male
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair
48 65
Female Female
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair
149
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
150
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
151
Female
152
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
25
Female
Run/Jog
153
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
11 days
Female
154
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
155 156 157
Male Female Female
Run/Jog Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog
47
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
158
Female
Run/Jog
159 160
Male Female
Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog
57 30
Female Female
Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog
161
Male
Run/Jog
162
Male
?
Female
163
Female
Run/Jog
?
164
Female
Run/Jog
?
165
Female
Run/Jog
166
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
167
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
49
Female
Stroller/Other Dependent
Walk/Wheelchair
168
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
169 170
Male Female
Run/Jog Walk/Wheelchair
15 40
Male Female
Non-Binary Other Independen
53
Male
Stroller/Other Dependent
?
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
171
Bicycle/Tag-along Walk/Wheelchair
12
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
?
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
?
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
27
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
172
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
173
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
174
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
175
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
71
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
176
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
20
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
11
177
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
41
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
37
178
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
179
Female
Run/Jog
34
Male
Run/Jog
181
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
?
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
182
Female
Run/Jog
?
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
183
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
184
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
?
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
185
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
187
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
29
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
188 189
Female Male
Bicycle/Tag-along Walk/Wheelchair
56 28
Male Female
Bicycle/Tag-along Walk/Wheelchair
190
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
?
191
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
75
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
192
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
31
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
193 194
Male Male
Bicycle/Tag-along Walk/Wheelchair
Walk/Wheelchair
180
186
?
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
?
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
195 196
Female Female
Walk/Wheelchair Bicycle/Tag-along
30 ?
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
197
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
198
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
7
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
199
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
?
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
200 201 202 203 204
Male Male Male Female Female
Run/Jog
? 35
Female Female
Run/Jog
205
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
38
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
206
Male
207
Male
208
Female
209
Male
Run/Jog
48
Female
Run/Jog
210 211
Male Male
Bicycle/Tag-along Walk/Wheelchair
212
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
parent
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
child
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
213
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
3
Female
Stroller/Other Dep
3
Female
Stroller/Other Dependent
214
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
215 216 217 218 219 220
Male Female Male Female Female Male
Run/Jog Walk/Wheelchair
66
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
221
Male
222 223
Female Female
224
Male
39
Female
225 226 227 228 229
Male Male Female Male Male
230
Male
231 232 233 234 235
Male Female Female Male Female
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair
70 Run/Jog Run/Jog 72
Female
Run/Jog
25
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
40s
Female
Run/Jog
?
Run/Jog
?
?
236
Male
Run/Jog
237
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
238
Female
Run/Jog
239
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
240
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
241 242
Male Male
Walk/Wheelchair Bicycle/Tag-along
38
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
243
Female
Run/Jog
66
Male
Run/Jog
244 245 246
Female Male Male
69
Male
Other Independent Walk/Wheelchair
68
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
247
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
42
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
248
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
249 250
Female Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
67 65
Male Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
251
Female
Run/Jog
29
Female
Run/Jog
252 253
Male Female
Run/Jog 68
Male
254
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
255
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
256
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
33
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
32
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
257
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
36
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
4
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274
Male Male Male Female Male Male Male Female Male Female
32 54
Female Female
18
Male
32
Female
34
Female
4
Male
Run/Jog
63
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
Female Female Female Female Female Female
Bicycle/Tag-along Run/Jog
Walk/Wheelchair
13
Female
16
Male
275
Male
276
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
278
Female
279
42
Female
15
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
79
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
52
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
280 281
Male Male
Bicycle/Tag-along Walk/Wheelchair
48 60
Male Female
Bicycle/Tag-along Walk/Wheelchair
282
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
283
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
284 285
Female Male
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair
69
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
286
Male
Run/Jog
287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294
Female Male Male Male Male Female Female Male
Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog
15
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog
45
Female
Run/Jog
18
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
295
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
28
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
?
296
Female
26
Male
297
Female
298
Female
7
Male
Other Independen
5
Male
299
Female
8
Female
6
Male
300
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
64
Female
301 302
Female Male
Walk/Wheelchair 56
Female
303
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
304 305
Female Male
Run/Jog
60
Male
11
Female
277
Walk/Wheelchair
Walk/Wheelchair
Run/Jog
Run/Jog
?
Other Independent 4
Male
306
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
307
Female
308
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
309
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
310
Male
311
Male
312
Male
313
Male
314
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
315
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
316 317 318
Male Male Male
Walk/Wheelchair
319
Male
Run/Jog
320
Female
321 322
Male Male
Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog
323
Male
Run/Jog
324
Female
Other Independent
325 326
Male Male
Walk/Wheelchair
327
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
328
Male
Run/Jog
329
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
330
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
331
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
332
Female
333
Female
52
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
70s
Female
3
Male
33
Female
7
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
18 months
Female
Stroller/Other Dependent
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
63
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
Run/Jog
42
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
Walk/Wheelchair
72
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
2
Female
3
Female
5
Bicycle/Tag-along
Male
334 335 336 337 338
Male Female Male Male Female
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Bicycle/Tag-along Walk/Wheelchair
339
Female
Run/Jog
340 341 342 343
Male Female Male Female
Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog
344
Female
Run/Jog
345 346 347
Female Male Male
Run/Jog Bicycle/Tag-along
348
Male
Run/Jog
349 350 351
Female Male Female
Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog Walk/Wheelchair
352
Female
Run/Jog
353 354
Female Male
Run/Jog Run/Jog
355
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
356 357
Male Male
Run/Jog
358
Female
359
Female
Run/Jog
360 361
Female Male
Walk/Wheelchair
362
Male
363
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
364
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
365
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
366
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
367
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
57
Female
16 months
Male
Run/Jog
Bicycle/Tag-along
?
25
Female
55
Male
Run/Jog
70 2
Male Male
Walk/Wheelchair
33
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
Female
Male
Run/Jog
368 369 370
Male Female Male
371
Male
372
Male
373 374 375 376
Male Male Female Male
Walk/Wheelchair Bicycle/Tag-along Walk/Wheelchair
377
Male
378 379 380 381
Female Female Male Male
382
Female
383
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair
46
Female
56
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
24
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
Walk/Wheelchair
48
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
Run/Jog Walk/Wheelchair
22
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
?
384
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
385
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
386
Male
387 388
Male Female
Bicycle/Tag-along Bicycle/Tag-along
389
Female
Run/Jog
390 391 392 393 394 395
Male Male Male Female Male Male
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Other Independent Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog
396
Male
Run/Jog
397 398 399 400 401 402 403
Female Female Male Male Male Male Male
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Bicycle/Tag-along
404
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
405 406 407 408
Female Male Male Male
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair
Walk/Wheelchair
? ?
8 6 40
? ? Female
Run/Jog
Female Female Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
?
3
?
Female
6
Female
409
Male
Run/Jog
410 411 412
Female Male Male
Run/Jog Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog
413
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
414
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
415
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
416
Male
Run/Jog
417
Female
418
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438
Female Male
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair
Male Male Female Female Female Male Female Male Female Female Male Male Male Female Female Female
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog Run/Jog Run/Jog Run/Jog Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Other Independent Run/Jog Run/Jog Walk/Wheelchair
439
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
440
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
441
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
442
Male
8
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
9
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
65
Male
2
Male
Stroller/Other Dependent
65 1
Male Male
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair
64
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
11
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
5
Male
Other Independent
9
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
443
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
444 445 446
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
447
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
448
Female
Bicycle/Tag-along
449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456
Female Female Female Female Female Female Male Female
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog
457
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
458 459 460
Male Male Male
Run/Jog Walk/Wheelchair Bicycle/Tag-along
461
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
462
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
463 464 465
Male Female Female
Run/Jog Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair
466
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
467 468
Female Male
Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog
469
Female
Run/Jog
470
Female
Run/Jog
471
Female
472
?
45
Female
Run/Jog
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
58
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
Walk/Wheelchair
73
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
13
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
473
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
474 475 476
Female Female Female
Run/Jog Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog
45
Female
Run/Jog
477
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
478 479 480
Female Female Female
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair
59
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
481
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
482 483 484 485
Female Male Female Male
Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog
486
Female
Run/Jog
487 488 489 490 491
Female Female Female Female Female
Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog Run/Jog Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair
492
Male
493
Male
494 495 496 497 498
Male Female Male Female Male
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair
499
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
500
Male
Run/Jog
Bike
501
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
27
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
502
Female
Run/Jog
56
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
503
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
81
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
504
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
505 506
Female Female
Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog
507
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
508 509 510 511 512
Female Male Male Female Female
Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog
71
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
65
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
513
Female
Run/Jog
514 515 516 517 518
Female Female Male Male Female
Walk/Wheelchair
519
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog Run/Jog
?
26
Female
Run/Jog
9
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
35
Male
Run/Jog
68
Female
3
Male
?
Stroller/Other Dependent
Male
76
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
Bicycle/Tag-along
520
Male
Walk/Wheelchair
67
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537
Male Female Female Male Male Male Female Female Male Female Female Male Female Male Female Male Female
Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Run/Jog Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Bicycle/Tag-along Run/Jog Bicycle/Tag-along Run/Jog Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair Walk/Wheelchair
66
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
73
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
74
Male
Bicycle/Tag-along
Female
Stroller/Other Dep
5 months
Male
Stroller/Other Dependent
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
18 months
Male
Stroller/Other Dependent
538
Male
539
Male
540
Male
Run/Jog
541 542 543 544 545
Male
Run/Jog
? 4 ? 42 27
Female
45
Female
Walk/Wheelchair
#
#5 - Travel (Choice)
21. w/Pet (Fill)
1 2
N N
3
N
4 5
N
NOTES
incomplete survey
6 7 8
N Y
9
N
10
Y
11
N
12
N
13
N
14 15 16 17 18 19
Y N Y N N N
Said most of his walk was not on the greenway
20
N
use trails for fun, social
21
N
Love it, proud of what city's done
22
N
23 24 25 26 27 28
No No No N
29
Y
30
N
31
Y
32 33
Y N
34
35
N
Love it! On oxygen, survey helper
Love the views
36
N
37
Y
38
N
39
N
40
N
Em
N
42 43
N
44
N
45
N
46
N
47 48 49 50 51 52
N Y N N N N
53
N
54
N
55 56
N N
57
N
58 59 60 61
N N N N
62
N
63
N
Just moved here, waiting for house to close; says greenways were very important reason for moving here Was with a large group of runners
64
Y
Part of big running group
65 66
N N
Part of big running group 10 miles total
67
N
68
N
69
N
70
71 72
N
Amazing (RAD)
Group of 10 runners Bicycling to lead runners
First visit, "first of many"
73 74
N
75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 Loves signage in RAD; I don't understand their route (cb)
83 84 85 86
Y
Looking forward to connecting to river Love it. Running 13 miles
87 88 89 90
Doing great!
91 92
93
Y
Uses greenway twice a day, once to ride bike and once to walk dog
94
N
More! Such a lovely thing to have in the neighborhood
Y N
Like the signs
95 96 97 98 99 100 101
N
102 103
Y
104
Y
105
From WD21 up to Shelburne then come back to WD21 to Wedge - 14 miles
106
Y
107
108 109 110
Y
111 112 113 114 115
Y
116
Y
117
Walked from Biscuit Head on Biltmore and headed north
118 119
Y
120 121 122 123 124 125 126
127
128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135
Yes Saved me mentally during pandemic. All the parking is great and a lot have shade. Tether ball. I'm loving it! A game changer. It's pretty awesome.
We are really grateful this happened. Good vibe. Favorite new additon to Asheville. Go everywhere you want without a car.
Highlight of visit!
136 137 138 139
Y
140 141 142
Y
143 144
Y
145
Y
So happy to have it!
146 147 148 149 150
Round trip to home via trail.
151 152 153
154
155 156 157
"Keep building more trails"
158 159 160 "We really appreciate all the work that was done to connect the greenways. The diversity of people/users on the greenways is what I like the most. It brings people together, and the area along the greenway has been cleared up."
161
162
Y
163 164 165 166 167
Y
Looking forward to Silverline Park area
168 169 170
Y Greatest thing Asheville has done in last decaded
171
172 173 174
Excited!
175
176 177
Greenway allowing them to see different aspects of the city they otherwise would not see Man surveyed was permanent resident. Had visitors from out of town.
178
179
We love it. Use this section more than any with food/shopping near, can be ?.
180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189
Trails main reason for visit
190 191 192 193 194
Everything's great. Grew up here and nice to see
195 196 197
Love the new facilities
198 199 200 201 202 203 204
Y
Y
205
So awesome to have this now
206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 Trail is wonderful and feels safe; along bringing grandkids
214 215 216 217 218 219 220
Y
221 222 223 224
Y
225 226 227 228 229
Y
Hope we keep it clean and trimmed; it is a beautiful
230 231 232 233 234 235
Y Fabulous
236 237 238 239 240
Y
241 242
Y
243 244 245 246 247
248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274
Y
Y
Love it
275 276
277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294
Y
295
Love signage-that's how found
296
Found trail by signs
297
Yes
298 299
Yes
300
301 302 303 304 305
Love it because it's flat
306
Y
Good job
307 308 309 310 311 312 313
Y
314
Glad to see trees planted; excited about extending greenways to the north and through Woodfin
315
316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323
Y
324 325 326
Y Y
327 328 329 330 331 332
333
Y
No complaints; love that the dog waste bags are full!
334 335 336 337 338
Gets ride home
339 340 341 342 343 344
person was grouchy
345 346 347 348 349 350 351 If more connections, would bike more
352 353 354
355
356 357
Y
358 359 360 361 362 363
364
365 366
367
Y
368 369 370 371
372 373 374 375 376
Y Y
377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385
386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408
A pretty good job.
409 410 411 412
413
Y
This has become one of my favorite things to do and places to go.
Y
Loves width and no traffic
414 415
416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442
Y Often use RAD, also
Y Y
Since the pandemic this greenway has kept me sane Surveyor has note that says "this is the lady who assaulted (?) (verbally) by ugly.
443 444 445 446 447
I love it
448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456
Love the greenway Y
Like it as it is
457 458 459 460 461
462
Y
463 464 465 466 467 468
Y
Enjoys it all; walks 2x a day Well maintained, love greenways
469 470 471 472
Y
473 474 475 476
Wonderful! Wide!
477
Y
478 479 480
Y Regularly commutes on trail as well
481 482 483 484 485 486
Y
Y Y
487 488 489 490 491 492
Y
493
Y
494 495 496 497 498
Y
499 This person was on Flying Bike tour ride and then out for run Not in same household but same group. Ride the other greenways lots
500 501 502
Y
503
Y Really clean, well maintained; uses trail to get to UNCA gardens
504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512
Y Y
513 514 515 516 517 518 519
I love using the greenway; settled here for running (?) Been loving it
520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537
Very pleasurable experience; people are nice
Y Y
Y
538 539
540 541 542 543 544 545
Really good enjoy getting further to downtown
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
CLOSE THE GAP APPENDIX 6: ONLINE SURVEY RESULTS
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Close the GAP Survey Project Engagement VIEWS
PARTICIPANTS
4,459
1,570
RESPONSES
COMMENTS
56,154
4,259
SUBSCRIBERS
603 * In what area of Asheville (or the region) do you live? By answering this question, it helps us make sure we are hearing from people across the City. We won't be able to identify your specific address. You can enter the nearest cross streets in the boxes below; or, using the map, drag the blue point to Asheville and then zoom in and drag it to the approximate location where you live. Toggle Clustering
1331
Map data ©2021 Google, INEGI
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
1/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
In what area of Asheville (or the region) do you work? If you are not working, you can skip this question. You can enter the nearest cross streets in the boxes below; or, using the map, drag the blue point to Asheville and then zoom in and drag it to the approximate location where you live. Toggle Clustering
2 2 1079
3
Map data ©2021 Google, INEGI
What is your favorite street to walk in Asheville?
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
2/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Thinking about your favorite street, please choose up to five (5) of the following design-related items that contribute to the quality of this walking street for you. (Select up to five options). 68%
Direct and complete sidewalk route (e.g. sidewalks where I need them with no missing sections)
757
56%
Shade or trees
623
49%
Low traffic and/or low car speeds
549
45%
Sidewalks separated from traffic (e.g. a grass strip so I don't have to walk next to traffic)
497
35%
Wider sidewalks without obstacles (e.g. utility poles)
386
33%
Quality of street crossings - location, visibility, medians for refuge
371
30%
Marked crosswalks
337
28%
Lighting at night
315
12%
Accessible features (e.g. well design curb ramps)
138
10%
Benches to rest
106
9%
Other (please specify)
103
1,114 Respondents
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
3/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Choose the top five (5) factors that make walking along some Asheville streets difficult. (Select up to five options). 79%
53%
Sidewalks missing (or significant gaps) on high traffic streets
Sidewalks missing to key destinations such as parks, schools, grocery stores
899
603
51%
Narrow sidewalks on high traffic streets
579
45%
Sidewalks without a buffer from driving lanes
519
43%
Sidewalks missing (or significant gaps) on low traffic neighborhood streets
496
39%
Buckled or cracked sidewalks, or other obstacles like puddles after rain
447
39%
Barriers or obstacles, like power poles, in the sidewalk
441
25%
Poor lighting
285
18%
Narrow sidewalks to key destinations such as parks, schools, grocery stores
205
9%
Narrow sidewalks on low traffic neighborhood streets
98
7%
Other
78
1,143 Respondents
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
4/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Select your top five (5) factors that make a street crossing difficult at locations with traffic lights. (Select up to five options). 77%
Turning vehicles do not stop for me when I'm crossing
808
46%
Missing or hard to see pedestrian signals
484
45%
Too long to wait for the pedestrian signal
472
31%
26%
25%
Not enough time to cross the street (the pedestrian signal is not long enough) Pedestrian signal does not have countdown information (I don't know how much time I have left to cross) Unsure of when it is safe to cross the street (I can't see the signal indications as a pedestrian)
331
272
260
15%
Missing or hard to reach pedestrian signal push buttons
160
13%
Missing audible or tactile crossing signals to cross safely
139
10%
Other (please specify)
104
1,051 Respondents
Select your top three (3) factors that make a street crossing difficult at locations without traffic lights. (Select up to three options). 83%
81%
37%
32%
3%
Drivers don't stop or yield for pedestrians
Crossing locations feel unsafe (e.g. cars travel too fast or there are too many cars to find a break in traffic)
I'm not sure where to cross (e.g. there are no marked crosswalks)
Marked crosswalks are too far apart (i.e. I have to walk too far to use a marked crossing).
Other (please specify)
890
871
396
339
37
1,073 Respondents
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
5/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Using the map to draw a line or drop a point, identify some of the uncomfortable walking streets you use or see people using. We encourage you to use the map; however, if it does not work for you, provide your answer in the comment box below. An uncomfortable walking street is one where we would worry about letting young children (think about an 8 year old) or older adults (think about an 80 year old) walk without assistance. To draw a line or add a point, zoom in to your area of interest. Then click the button on the top right, 'Draw Line' or 'Add Point.' Then click on the map to create a line segment or point. When you are done adding points or lines, a comment box will appear; you can add notes to this box or if you make any errors you can click the 'X' on the top right of the comment box to delete and start over.
As an alternative to mapping, indicate the street/route name and beginning/end points. Please be as specific as possible.
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
6/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Select your top five (5) areas where the City should prioritize sidewalk connections, accessibility improvements or greenways. (Click your top selections and they will move above and turn blue. You can then drag the blue selections to order your priorities. Then click 'Confirm Priorities'.). 49%
Along routes to schools
Rank: 2.22
432
58%
Along routes to parks, libraries or community centers
Rank: 2.41
516
In areas with vehicle related safety concerns (including high traffic
Rank: 2.53
487
Rank: 2.73
489
Rank: 2.82
17
Rank: 2.84
385
55%
55% 2%
roads, higher speed roads or locations with pedestrian crash history)
Along routes to grocery stores and shopping areas
Other (please specify in comment box)
In areas with equity concerns (neighborhoods with barriers that
43%
prevent people from accessing essential needs, opportunities for wellbeing, and their full potential)
31%
In residential areas
Rank: 2.88
278
42%
Along transit lines and near transit stops
Rank: 2.99
372
Rank: 3.53
49
Rank: 3.61
105
6% 12%
Near public buildings like City Hall or the Health Department
Along routes to healthcare offices and hospitals 888 Respondents
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
7/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
If you were in charge of Asheville's pedestrian and greenway programs and budget, which of the following efforts would you prioritize to make walking and greenway use more convenient, safe, and well connected. (Select up to five options). 75%
Connect the major greenways that can get us across the city (greenway network)
719
67%
Add missing sidewalks
638
59%
Add more neighborhood greenway connections
563
42%
Connect sidewalks and greenways to transit
400
41%
Address speeding traffic (e.g. traffic calming)
391
28%
Increase maintenance and repair of existing sidewalks
265
26%
Add more natural surface (dirt trail) connections
252
24%
Add more marked crosswalks and/or more visible marked crosswalks
233
24%
Add street trees, plantings and landscaping
227
14%
Add new or improved street lights (for night time visibility)
134
12%
12%
Add pedestrian features (benches, signs and maps highlighting pedestrian destinations)
Add missing curb ramps
116
112
7%
Improve curb ramps that are challenging to use
66
5%
Other (please specify)
48
4%
Add countdown timers at pedestrian signals
41
959 Respondents
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
8/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
How should the City fund new or improve existing greenway or pedestrian connections? (Click your top selections and they will move above and turn blue. You can then drag the blue selections to order your priorities. Then click 'Confirm Priorities'). 57% 9%
Rank: 2.00
468
Rank: 2.01
77
Rank: 2.06
505
With current funding sources
Rank: 2.07
423
Grant programs and/or outside funding sources (not normally
Rank: 2.26
434
Rank: 3.14
224
More developer participation
Other (please specify in comment box)
61%
51%
53%
27%
Dedicated tax increase for pedestrian improvements (e.g. sidewalks, greenways, accessibility improvements)
available for sidewalk maintenance)
General tax increases 826 Respondents
How willing would you be to pay a small increase in property taxes to fund pedestrian and greenway projects in the City? (Click and use the slider to indicate your willingness). As a way to fund pedestrian or greenway projects, many communities bring a property tax increase proposal to the voters for approval. The community decides what amount is needed (i.e. a "penny") and if approved, taxpayers would pay an additional penny, or one cent, on every dollar of property tax. Average
Not at all willing
Very willing
How much of an increase in property tax would you support to fund pedestrian and greenway projects? (Click and use the slider to indicate your willingness). Average
No pennies
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
Two pennies
9/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
How do you use the City's greenways (or multi-use paths)? (Select up to five options). 94%
Exercise, fitness and health
879
61%
Socialization with friends
569
45%
Walk my pet
419
34%
Access daily needs (shopping, groceries, restaurants, doctor, etc.)
317
33%
Place to play with my kids or family
306
19%
Commute to work - by bike
176
7%
Commute to work - walk / wheelchair
63
5%
Take my kid(s) to school
49
4%
Other (please specify)
33
936 Respondents
How often do you use Asheville's greenways? 30% 2-3 times per week 15% 2-3 times per month 12% 1 time per week 12% 4-6 times per week 9% I am not a regular greenway user 9% Everyday 7% 1 time per month 5% A few times per year 2% Other (please specify)
965 respondents
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
10/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
As a greenway user, these improvements would enhance my experience. (Select up to five options). 55%
Correct drainage (puddles or muddy spots)
471
47%
Better crossings at roadways
404
39%
Repair of cracks, roots, trip hazards
336
30%
Better lighting
258
30%
More trash cans along greenways
255
29%
Bathrooms
250
24%
More dog waste stations
208
21%
Places to rest or sit
176
17%
Wayfinding
143
14%
Other (please specify)
116
858 Respondents
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
11/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
What would increase your use of greenways as a transportation network through all parts of the day and seasons of the year? (Select up to five options). 83%
Better connectivity (greenways going to the places I need to get to)
752
51%
More frequent access points to the greenway
461
33%
Lighting along the greenway
298
31%
More "eyes" on the greenway (more people on the greenway, proximity
279
to active places such as dense residential area or commercial areas)
30%
More safe crossing roads crossing
268
27%
Bike share on or near the greenway
244
24%
More trees for shade
220
21%
More parking at trailheads
186
11%
Park and ride lots
100
Other (please specify)
52
6%
902 Respondents
How likely are you to use the following greenway or greenway connector types for recreation and transportation needs? (Click and use the slider to indicate your willingness). Traditional Asphalt or Concrete Greenway Average
Very unlikely
Very likely
Traditional Greenway with Natural Surface Shoulder Average
Very unlikely
Very likely
Sidewalks with Bike Lane Average
Very unlikely
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
Very likely
12/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Sidewalk with Buffered Bike Lane Average
Very unlikely
Very likely
Sidewalks with Bicycle Boulevard (Signs, Markings and Traffic Calming) Average
Very unlikely
Very likely
Shared Streets Average
Very unlikely
Very likely
Designated Roadway Shoulders Average
Very unlikely
Very likely
Combination Sidewalks with Cycletrack or Protected Bike Lane (Separated from the roadway with curbing or other vertical element) Average
Very unlikely
Very likely
Multi-use sidepath (shared bicycle and pedestrian facility adjacent to a roadway) Average
Very unlikely
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
Very likely
13/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
The City is considering partnering in a community-supported initiative to develop and maintain a natural surface trail system, called Asheville Unpaved. How likely are you to use this natural trail system? Natural surface trails are unpaved, dirt trails that would connect with greenways and sidewalks to help build a network to allow people to get places. 76% Very likely 18% Somewhat likely 4% Not very likely 1% I will not use
938 respondents
If you would use the trail system, what kind of user would you most likely be? (Click your top selections and they will move above and turn blue. You can then drag the blue selections to order your priorities. Then click 'Confirm Priorities'). 79%
Walker/Hiker
Rank: 1.62
688
54%
Other bicyclist (cross, gravel, road, hybrid)
Rank: 1.69
466
36%
Runner
Rank: 1.80
316
23%
Mountain biker
Rank: 1.97
196
2%
Other (please specify in comment box)
Rank: 2.52
21
4%
User of adaptive recreation equipment
Rank: 3.21
34
866 Respondents
The idea of Asheville Unpaved will need community support, including donations, volunteers for maintenance, and partnerships and sponsorships with organizations. Are you a part of an organization that would be interested in supporting this initiative? Please list your contact information and how you might be able to help.
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
14/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
What gender do you identify as? (Select all that apply). 54%
Female
459
43%
Male
364
3%
Prefer not to say
1%
Non-binary/third gender
8
0%
Other
2
0%
Transgender
0
0%
Prefer to self-describe
0
24
854 Respondents
What is your age? 27% 36-45 20% 56-65 19% 46-55 16% 26-35 13% 66-75 6% Others
944 respondents
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
15/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
What is your race? (Select all that apply). 89%
White
790
7%
Prefer not to answer
63
1%
Some other race or origin
11
1%
Asian
10
1%
American Indian or Alaskan Native
8
1%
Prefer to self-describe
8
0%
Black or African American
4
0%
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0
884 Respondents
Are you of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or of Spanish origin? (Select all that apply). 87%
No, not of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin
670
8%
Prefer not to answer
61
2%
Some other race, ethnicity, or origin
12
1%
Yes, Another Hispanic, Latino/a/x or Spanish origin
11
1%
Yes, Cuban
9
1%
Prefer to self-describe
5
1%
Yes, Mexican, Mexican American, Chicano/a/x
4
0%
Yes, Puerto Rican
2
771 Respondents
Please share your contact information. Survey participants who provide their name and email will be entered in a drawing to receive a $25 Ingles Gift Card, awarded after the survey has closed. No data to display...
ADA Transition Plan Survey https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
16/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Project Engagement VIEWS
PARTICIPANTS
1,007
251
RESPONSES
COMMENTS
4,955
451
SUBSCRIBERS
51 * In what area of Asheville (or the region) do you live? By answering this question, it helps us make sure we are hearing from people across the City. We won't be able to identify your specific address. You can enter the nearest cross streets in the boxes below; or, using the map, drag the blue point to Asheville and then zoom in and drag it to the approximate location where you live. Toggle Clustering
211
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
17/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
In what area of Asheville (or the region) do you work? If you are not working, you can skip this question. You can enter the nearest cross streets in the boxes below; or, using the map, drag the blue point to Asheville and then zoom in and drag it to the approximate location where you live. Toggle Clustering
187
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
2
18/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Rank your top five (5) items by order of importance. (Click your top selections and they will move above and turn blue. You can then drag the blue selections to order your priorities. Then click 'Confirm Priorities'). 81%
Pedestrian sidewalks
Rank: 1.72
162
74%
Greenways and trails
Rank: 1.76
147
59%
Street crossings, including traffic signals
Rank: 3.16
117
41%
Pedestrian curb ramps
Rank: 3.22
81
31%
Access TO bus stops (getting to the bus stop)
Rank: 3.25
61
Rank: 3.47
15
8%
Other (please specify in comment box)
24%
Access AT bus stops (using the bus stop)
Rank: 3.52
48
22%
On-street parking
Rank: 3.72
43
17%
Accessible signage and wayfinding assistance
Rank: 3.88
34
200 Respondents i cannot believe that there isn't a safe place to cross broadway between weaver and chestnut. ! and, even worse, no pedestrian crossing at the 240 bridge/ramp near moog on broadway to get to lexington. super dangerous. 3 months ago
12 Agree
The lack of sidewalks in many parts of Asheville is embarrassing, particularly on bus routes. Merrimon Avenue past Beaver dam and Swannanoa River Road near the municipal golf course come to mind. 3 months ago
9 Agree
Benches and trash service at bus stops 3 months ago
7 Agree
Honestly everything needs work in this city. Limiting to 5 priorities doesn't quite cut it. I couldn't imagine trying to navigate Asheville as someone with mobility limitations. 3 months ago
4 Agree
On street parking that blocks sight of on coming traffic! 3 months ago
3 Agree
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
19/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Think about the places you travel. Indicate the difficulty that sidewalk and curb ramp obstacles create as you move around Asheville. Not Not at
No curb ramp where needed.
Applicable
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
all
(I do not
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
experience
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
this) 28%
15%
13%
23%
12%
9%
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
Not
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience this)
Challenging curb
14%
12%
31%
10%
9%
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
Not
too steep, poor
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
turning areas, poor
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience
ramps. For example,
drainage (puddles).
25%
this) Sidewalks in poor
25%
28%
31%
7%
4%
5%
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
Not
example, cracks and
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
broken areas that
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience
condition. For
create obstacles.
this) Sidewalks are too
28%
27%
29%
7%
4%
6%
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
Not
obstacles in the
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
sidewalk. For
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience
narrow or there are
example, utility poles in the middle of a
this)
sidewalk. Signalized roadway
16%
17%
28%
17%
9%
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
Not
accessible features
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
like audible
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience
crossings lack
pedestrian signals or broken, missing and
13%
this)
hard to reach push buttons. Unsignalized
23%
24%
27%
10%
6%
9%
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
Not
with inadequate
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
facilities to cross the
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience
roadway crossings
road. For example, missing or poorly
this)
aligned pedestrian ramps. Skewed or crooked crosswalks markings.
9%
14%
26%
18%
16%
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
17% Not
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience this)
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
20/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Not Not at
Applicable
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
all
(I do not
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
experience
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
this) 30%
Ability to get to bus
20%
15%
17%
12%
6%
stops. For example,
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
Not
no sidewalk access,
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
no place to sit, (no
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience
sidewalk or poor design). Not enough accessible on-street parking.
this) 13%
13%
25%
18%
10%
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
20% Not
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience this)
169 respondents How about a road diet on Broadway from Chestnut to the I-240 bridge? Why are there 4 vehicular lanes here? Let's get bike lanes and/or parallel parking (adding a buffer between the cars and pedestrians much needed!) 3 months ago
12 Agree
Bike lanes are not consistent or sometimes not wide enough and biking in the road can be scary 3 months ago
10 Agree
We need to slow down the traffic on many of the main streets in Asheville 3 months ago
6 Agree
So many sidewalks have poles right in the middle with no ramps nearby to allow for ADA travelers to navigate around them. State Street in particular is a significant pedestrian corridor that forces ADA travelers into the busy, high traffic streets. Many bike lanes simply end at the most inopportune and dangerous places. 3 months ago
5 Agree
No seating, no trash cans, and no covered area at bus stops is a huge problem, but it isn't a problem for me personally, so I didn't rank it. But it still needs to be addressed! 3 months ago
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
4 Agree
21/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
How do you get around on an average day? 71% I have a car and drive 14% I walk or use a wheelchair or other mobility device to get around 6% I have a reliable automobile transportation option, for example, I use a service or have someone who can take me places 5% Other (please specify) 4% I use Asheville's transit system (ART) 0% I use Mountain Mobility
189 respondents biking and walking are also other ways that I get around town 3 months ago
9 Agree
I would bike but it is extremely unsafe, particularly my commute on Biltmore from Biltmore Village to downtown. 3 months ago
4 Agree
Also use Mountain Mobility one month ago
plus Mountain Mobility and walking. one month ago
My boyfriend uses a wheelchair, and you just don’t know how impassible how our city is until you try to get around on wheels like that. Minor cracks to us can cause someone to flip over. Let’s not wait for some one to get hurt, or killed, or the city get another huge lawsuit before we fix our sidewalks. one month ago
Are there times when you would like to walk or use a mobility device to reach a destination, but you do not because the curb ramps, sidewalks and street crossings conditions present barriers? If so, please indicate your alternative transportation. 65% Yes and I have a car and can drive to places I cannot walk 27% No 4% Yes and I have a reliable transportation option, for example, I use a service or have someone who can take me places 4% Others
181 respondents
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
22/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
What routes/areas should the City prioritize for accessibility improvements? (Click your top selections and they will move above and turn blue. You can then drag the blue selections to order your priorities. Then click 'Confirm Priorities'). In areas with vehicle related safety concerns (including high traffic
62%
Rank: 2.63
93
In areas with higher equity concerns (neighborhoods with barriers thatRank: 2.66
80
roads, higher speed roads or locations with pedestrian crash history)
53%
prevent people from accessing essential needs, opportunities for wellbeing, and their full potential)
63%
Along routes to grocery stores and shopping areas
Rank: 2.87
95
55%
Along routes to parks, libraries or community centers
Rank: 3.04
83
49%
Along routes to schools
Rank: 3.39
74
Rank: 3.50
4
3%
Other (please specify in comment box)
39%
Along transit lines or near transit stops
Rank: 3.69
59
31%
Along routes to healthcare offices and hospitals
Rank: 4.26
47
32%
In residential areas
Rank: 4.44
48
19%
Near public buildings like City Hall or the Health Department
Rank: 5.96
28
151 Respondents DOWNTOWN! Bury utilities if you have to - getting poles out of sidewalks, wider sidewalks everywhere possible, midblock crossings, street trees, and intersections where plenty of people can gather comfortably to wait to cross. 3 months ago
11 Agree
I like the idea of getting rid of electric poles so you have more room on sidewalks. Too many are too narrow for a wheelchair to negotiate. 3 months ago
6 Agree
A frame signage in front of stores used for advertising creates such a barrier. Especially for people who are blind/visually impaired. Not a good universal design ie. pushing strollers, pulling carts. 3 months ago
1 Agree
Restrooms and benches 3 months ago
1 Agree
All of these are obviously important but certainly routes that are frequently used and utilized by pedestrians but remain inaccessible to those with disabilities. one month ago
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
23/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Tell us the places you would like to walk or use a mobility device to get to. Along Broadway to Riverside Drive; on Merrimon (safely - need a buffer between cars and pedestrians!!!!); Swannanoa River Road (either on a greenway or a sidewalk); Tunnel Road (with a buffer between cars and pedestrians!!!) 3 months ago
7 Agree
Smokey park hwy, Patton ave 2 months ago
6 Agree
Merrimon Ave, Lakeside Drive, Tunnel Rd 3 months ago
3 Agree
Would love to walk from sand hill 600 block road to hominy creek greenway and sports complex 3 months ago
3 Agree
Can all of Asheville look like the new RAD? 3 months ago
3 Agree
The City of Asheville is working to identify areas that are high priority for pedestrian facility repairs. Use the map or comment box below to show us specific locations that cause problems when traveling as a pedestrian (including use of mobility devices). To draw a line or add a point, zoom in to your area of interest. Then click the button on the top right, 'Draw Line' or 'Add Point.' Then click on the map to create a line segment or point. When you are done adding points or lines, a comment box will appear; you can add notes to this box or if you make any errors you can click the 'X' on the top right of the comment box to delete and start over.
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
24/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
We encourage you to use the map; however, if it does not work for you, provide your answer here. Indicate the street/route name and beginning/end points. Please be as specific as possible. Johnston Blvd to Haywood Rd.; Leicester Hwy to Patton. Bridge from Amboy Road to Lyman. 3 months ago
7 Agree
cutting brush back along city sidewalks and roads would be a good start. leicester highway , sweeten creek , merrimon, broadway, riverside 2 months ago
5 Agree
Merrion Avenue is a nightmare. the entire length needs to be replaced, the driveway aprons are not ADA compliant, the concrete is broken, cracked, there are utility poles in the way. there needs to be better street lighting to make it safe at night 3 months ago
2 Agree
Between Amboy, Biltmore Village, Tunnel Road, and Fairview, along Swannanoa River 3 months ago
2 Agree
Hominy creek road between the greenways 2 months ago
1 Agree
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
25/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
I am an individual that has functional needs or disabilities affecting my ability to use the streets, sidewalks, trails, or transit system in Asheville. The things that affect me include: (Select all that apply) 78%
Does not apply
98
17%
Walking
21
7%
Moving
9
5%
Breathing
6
4%
Vision
5
3%
Hearing
4
3%
Cognitive abilities (thinking or focus)
4
2%
Other (please specify)
2
126 Respondents Wheelchair user, so adequate sidewalks and curb ramps are essential. But shucks, even people with strollers have a hard time! 3 months ago
4 Agree
Why does Asheville continually rank as the most dangerous city for pedestrians, yet keeps on approving mega developments without consideration of the infrastructure needs and geographical limitations? It seems Asheville's motto is "We're on the road to nowhere." We seem to value roads more than the destination and definitely more than the safety of pedestrians and cyclists. 2 months ago
2 Agree
I am a strong supporter of accommodations for aging in place and with pedestrian improvements North Asheville has the potential to be a great area for older adults or those unable to drive and I am very cognizant of these challenging whether they apply to me. So, while this does not currently apply it may in the future. 3 months ago
2 Agree
Stamina while walking, so distance is my main issue. 3 months ago
2 Agree
Cane user for walking due to mobility challenges. Too many ramps and driveways have slopes that are severe and I fear for injury or falling into traffic. 2 months ago
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
1 Agree
26/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
I am related to, or care for, an individual that has functional needs or disabilities affecting their ability to use the streets, sidewalks, trails, or transit system in Asheville. The things that affect them include: (Select all that apply) 68%
Does not apply
84
24%
Walking
30
12%
Moving
15
7%
Hearing
8
7%
Vision
8
7%
Cognitive abilities (thinking or focus)
8
6%
Breathing
7
0%
Other (please specify)
0
123 Respondents I am a senior and can see in the future the need for having better sidewalks 2 months ago
1 Agree
It is very difficult to get around downtown using a wheelchair. Sidewalks and curb ramps are in bad shape and many of the curb ramps are too steep. 2 months ago
1 Agree
My boyfriend has a spinal cord injury and uses a wheelchair. one month ago
Parent to a young child. 3 months ago
Poll Questions 'Other' Responses: children going to school or walking to park 2 months ago
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
27/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Please tell us if you use a smartphone to assist you with your travel as a pedestrian (including using mobility devices). If so, what services do you use? (Select all that apply). 74%
Yes, for mapping and directions
26%
Yes, for mapping to see if sidewalks or trails are present
35
21%
Yes, for bus schedules or stop locations
28
13%
No, I prefer not to use one
17
100
8%
Yes, to check terrain
11
6%
No, I don't have one
8
1%
Yes, to use apps that provide sighted assistance
2
1%
Other tool
2
136 Respondents Please don't let NCDOT do what others are doing and having people rely on smart phone apps to connect to cars and traffic signals. If the phone won't regularly work properly with earbuds, there is no way it will work with their primitive technology. 2 months ago
2 Agree
I often use the Asheville App to send comments on areas that need maintenance. 3 months ago
1 Agree
Use a smartphone occasionally to confirm a location: Have I arrived at my destination? Where exactly did the neighbor see a bear? one month ago
I don't use a smart phone because a smart phone with any kind of mobility app on it will pull my attention away from my cane and my environment, and those are the two primary mobility devices to keep me safe. one month ago
Poll Questions 'Other' Responses: Use phone, just not for above features. We use the Asheville App to report sidewalk issues. one month ago
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
28/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
What are the most effective ways for you to receive information on upcoming events, announcements, projects, or general information about the ADA Transition Plan? (Select all that apply). 64%
Email notifications
98
52%
Social Media
80
26%
Press release
40
16%
City of Asheville Pedestrian web page and tools
24
6%
2%
Public meetings
9
Emails to disability groups (if you have a suggested contact, please list that in the comment box below)
3
2%
Other
3
0%
Brochures
0
153 Respondents VIP Support Group (c/o Judy Davis) one month ago
NC Spinal Cord Injury Association (NCSCIA.org) Spinal Cord Injury Support Group - meets once a month at Care Partners (Debbie Johnson, Physical Therapist) one month ago
I found out about this survey through Nextdoor post. 2 months ago
Poll Questions 'Other' Responses: Text one month ago
Avl Commission for the Blind, Paula Springer one month ago
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
29/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
What gender do you identify as? (Select all that apply). 57%
Female
89
39%
Male
61
3%
Prefer not to say
5
1%
Non-binary/third gender
2
0%
Transgender
0
0%
Other
0
0%
Prefer to self-describe
0
157 Respondents
What is your age? 26% 36-45 20% 56-65 17% 26-35 17% 46-55 13% 66-75 3% Over 75 4% Others
164 respondents
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
30/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
What is your race? (Select all that apply). 88%
White
139
6%
Prefer not to answer
9
3%
Some other race or origin
4
2%
Black or African American
3
1%
American Indian or Alaskan Native
2
1%
Asian
2
1%
Prefer to self-describe
1
0%
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0
158 Respondents
Are you of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or of Spanish origin? (Select all that apply). 89%
No, not of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin
131
6%
Prefer not to answer
9
2%
Yes, Another Hispanic, Latino/a/x or Spanish origin
3
1%
Yes, Cuban
2
1%
Yes, Mexican, Mexican American, Chicano/a/x
1
1%
Some other race, ethnicity, or origin
1
1%
Prefer to self-describe
1
0%
Yes, Puerto Rican
0
148 Respondents
Please share your contact information. Survey participants who provide their name and email will be entered in a drawing to receive a $25 Ingles Gift Card, awarded after the survey has closed. No data to display...
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
31/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Project Engagement VIEWS
PARTICIPANTS
4,459
1,570
RESPONSES
COMMENTS
56,154
4,259
SUBSCRIBERS
603 * In what area of Asheville (or the region) do you live? By answering this question, it helps us make sure we are hearing from people across the City. We won't be able to identify your specific address. You can enter the nearest cross streets in the boxes below; or, using the map, drag the blue point to Asheville and then zoom in and drag it to the approximate location where you live. Toggle Clustering
1331
Map data ©2021 Google, INEGI
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
32/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
In what area of Asheville (or the region) do you work? If you are not working, you can skip this question. You can enter the nearest cross streets in the boxes below; or, using the map, drag the blue point to Asheville and then zoom in and drag it to the approximate location where you live. Toggle Clustering
2 2 1079
3
Map data ©2021 Google, INEGI
What is your favorite street to walk in Asheville?
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
33/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Thinking about your favorite street, please choose up to five (5) of the following design-related items that contribute to the quality of this walking street for you. (Select up to five options). 68%
Direct and complete sidewalk route (e.g. sidewalks where I need them with no missing sections)
757
56%
Shade or trees
623
49%
Low traffic and/or low car speeds
549
45%
Sidewalks separated from traffic (e.g. a grass strip so I don't have to walk next to traffic)
497
35%
Wider sidewalks without obstacles (e.g. utility poles)
386
33%
Quality of street crossings - location, visibility, medians for refuge
371
30%
Marked crosswalks
337
28%
Lighting at night
315
12%
Accessible features (e.g. well design curb ramps)
138
10%
Benches to rest
106
9%
Other (please specify)
103
1,114 Respondents
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
34/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Choose the top five (5) factors that make walking along some Asheville streets difficult. (Select up to five options). 79%
53%
Sidewalks missing (or significant gaps) on high traffic streets
Sidewalks missing to key destinations such as parks, schools, grocery stores
899
603
51%
Narrow sidewalks on high traffic streets
579
45%
Sidewalks without a buffer from driving lanes
519
43%
Sidewalks missing (or significant gaps) on low traffic neighborhood streets
496
39%
Buckled or cracked sidewalks, or other obstacles like puddles after rain
447
39%
Barriers or obstacles, like power poles, in the sidewalk
441
25%
Poor lighting
285
18%
Narrow sidewalks to key destinations such as parks, schools, grocery stores
205
9%
Narrow sidewalks on low traffic neighborhood streets
98
7%
Other
78
1,143 Respondents
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
35/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Select your top five (5) factors that make a street crossing difficult at locations with traffic lights. (Select up to five options). 77%
Turning vehicles do not stop for me when I'm crossing
808
46%
Missing or hard to see pedestrian signals
484
45%
Too long to wait for the pedestrian signal
472
31%
26%
25%
Not enough time to cross the street (the pedestrian signal is not long enough) Pedestrian signal does not have countdown information (I don't know how much time I have left to cross) Unsure of when it is safe to cross the street (I can't see the signal indications as a pedestrian)
331
272
260
15%
Missing or hard to reach pedestrian signal push buttons
160
13%
Missing audible or tactile crossing signals to cross safely
139
10%
Other (please specify)
104
1,051 Respondents
Select your top three (3) factors that make a street crossing difficult at locations without traffic lights. (Select up to three options). 83%
81%
37%
32%
3%
Drivers don't stop or yield for pedestrians
Crossing locations feel unsafe (e.g. cars travel too fast or there are too many cars to find a break in traffic)
I'm not sure where to cross (e.g. there are no marked crosswalks)
Marked crosswalks are too far apart (i.e. I have to walk too far to use a marked crossing).
Other (please specify)
890
871
396
339
37
1,073 Respondents
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
36/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Using the map to draw a line or drop a point, identify some of the uncomfortable walking streets you use or see people using. We encourage you to use the map; however, if it does not work for you, provide your answer in the comment box below. An uncomfortable walking street is one where we would worry about letting young children (think about an 8 year old) or older adults (think about an 80 year old) walk without assistance. To draw a line or add a point, zoom in to your area of interest. Then click the button on the top right, 'Draw Line' or 'Add Point.' Then click on the map to create a line segment or point. When you are done adding points or lines, a comment box will appear; you can add notes to this box or if you make any errors you can click the 'X' on the top right of the comment box to delete and start over.
As an alternative to mapping, indicate the street/route name and beginning/end points. Please be as specific as possible.
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
37/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Select your top five (5) areas where the City should prioritize sidewalk connections, accessibility improvements or greenways. (Click your top selections and they will move above and turn blue. You can then drag the blue selections to order your priorities. Then click 'Confirm Priorities'.). 49%
Along routes to schools
Rank: 2.22
432
58%
Along routes to parks, libraries or community centers
Rank: 2.41
516
In areas with vehicle related safety concerns (including high traffic
Rank: 2.53
487
Rank: 2.73
489
Rank: 2.82
17
Rank: 2.84
385
55%
55% 2%
roads, higher speed roads or locations with pedestrian crash history)
Along routes to grocery stores and shopping areas
Other (please specify in comment box)
In areas with equity concerns (neighborhoods with barriers that
43%
prevent people from accessing essential needs, opportunities for wellbeing, and their full potential)
31%
In residential areas
Rank: 2.88
278
42%
Along transit lines and near transit stops
Rank: 2.99
372
Rank: 3.53
49
Rank: 3.61
105
6% 12%
Near public buildings like City Hall or the Health Department
Along routes to healthcare offices and hospitals 888 Respondents
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
38/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
If you were in charge of Asheville's pedestrian and greenway programs and budget, which of the following efforts would you prioritize to make walking and greenway use more convenient, safe, and well connected. (Select up to five options). 75%
Connect the major greenways that can get us across the city (greenway network)
719
67%
Add missing sidewalks
638
59%
Add more neighborhood greenway connections
563
42%
Connect sidewalks and greenways to transit
400
41%
Address speeding traffic (e.g. traffic calming)
391
28%
Increase maintenance and repair of existing sidewalks
265
26%
Add more natural surface (dirt trail) connections
252
24%
Add more marked crosswalks and/or more visible marked crosswalks
233
24%
Add street trees, plantings and landscaping
227
14%
Add new or improved street lights (for night time visibility)
134
12%
12%
Add pedestrian features (benches, signs and maps highlighting pedestrian destinations)
Add missing curb ramps
116
112
7%
Improve curb ramps that are challenging to use
66
5%
Other (please specify)
48
4%
Add countdown timers at pedestrian signals
41
959 Respondents
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
39/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
How should the City fund new or improve existing greenway or pedestrian connections? (Click your top selections and they will move above and turn blue. You can then drag the blue selections to order your priorities. Then click 'Confirm Priorities'). 57% 9%
Rank: 2.00
468
Rank: 2.01
77
Rank: 2.06
505
With current funding sources
Rank: 2.07
423
Grant programs and/or outside funding sources (not normally
Rank: 2.26
434
Rank: 3.14
224
More developer participation
Other (please specify in comment box)
61%
51%
53%
27%
Dedicated tax increase for pedestrian improvements (e.g. sidewalks, greenways, accessibility improvements)
available for sidewalk maintenance)
General tax increases 826 Respondents
How willing would you be to pay a small increase in property taxes to fund pedestrian and greenway projects in the City? (Click and use the slider to indicate your willingness). As a way to fund pedestrian or greenway projects, many communities bring a property tax increase proposal to the voters for approval. The community decides what amount is needed (i.e. a "penny") and if approved, taxpayers would pay an additional penny, or one cent, on every dollar of property tax. Average
Not at all willing
Very willing
How much of an increase in property tax would you support to fund pedestrian and greenway projects? (Click and use the slider to indicate your willingness). Average
No pennies
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
Two pennies
40/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
How do you use the City's greenways (or multi-use paths)? (Select up to five options). 94%
Exercise, fitness and health
879
61%
Socialization with friends
569
45%
Walk my pet
419
34%
Access daily needs (shopping, groceries, restaurants, doctor, etc.)
317
33%
Place to play with my kids or family
306
19%
Commute to work - by bike
176
7%
Commute to work - walk / wheelchair
63
5%
Take my kid(s) to school
49
4%
Other (please specify)
33
936 Respondents
How often do you use Asheville's greenways? 30% 2-3 times per week 15% 2-3 times per month 12% 1 time per week 12% 4-6 times per week 9% I am not a regular greenway user 9% Everyday 7% 1 time per month 5% A few times per year 2% Other (please specify)
965 respondents
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
41/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
As a greenway user, these improvements would enhance my experience. (Select up to five options). 55%
Correct drainage (puddles or muddy spots)
471
47%
Better crossings at roadways
404
39%
Repair of cracks, roots, trip hazards
336
30%
Better lighting
258
30%
More trash cans along greenways
255
29%
Bathrooms
250
24%
More dog waste stations
208
21%
Places to rest or sit
176
17%
Wayfinding
143
14%
Other (please specify)
116
858 Respondents
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
42/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
What would increase your use of greenways as a transportation network through all parts of the day and seasons of the year? (Select up to five options). 83%
Better connectivity (greenways going to the places I need to get to)
752
51%
More frequent access points to the greenway
461
33%
Lighting along the greenway
298
31%
More "eyes" on the greenway (more people on the greenway, proximity
279
to active places such as dense residential area or commercial areas)
30%
More safe crossing roads crossing
268
27%
Bike share on or near the greenway
244
24%
More trees for shade
220
21%
More parking at trailheads
186
11%
Park and ride lots
100
Other (please specify)
52
6%
902 Respondents
How likely are you to use the following greenway or greenway connector types for recreation and transportation needs? (Click and use the slider to indicate your willingness). Traditional Asphalt or Concrete Greenway Average
Very unlikely
Very likely
Traditional Greenway with Natural Surface Shoulder Average
Very unlikely
Very likely
Sidewalks with Bike Lane Average
Very unlikely
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
Very likely
43/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Sidewalk with Buffered Bike Lane Average
Very unlikely
Very likely
Sidewalks with Bicycle Boulevard (Signs, Markings and Traffic Calming) Average
Very unlikely
Very likely
Shared Streets Average
Very unlikely
Very likely
Designated Roadway Shoulders Average
Very unlikely
Very likely
Combination Sidewalks with Cycletrack or Protected Bike Lane (Separated from the roadway with curbing or other vertical element) Average
Very unlikely
Very likely
Multi-use sidepath (shared bicycle and pedestrian facility adjacent to a roadway) Average
Very unlikely
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
Very likely
44/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
The City is considering partnering in a community-supported initiative to develop and maintain a natural surface trail system, called Asheville Unpaved. How likely are you to use this natural trail system? Natural surface trails are unpaved, dirt trails that would connect with greenways and sidewalks to help build a network to allow people to get places. 76% Very likely 18% Somewhat likely 4% Not very likely 1% I will not use
938 respondents
If you would use the trail system, what kind of user would you most likely be? (Click your top selections and they will move above and turn blue. You can then drag the blue selections to order your priorities. Then click 'Confirm Priorities'). 79%
Walker/Hiker
Rank: 1.62
688
54%
Other bicyclist (cross, gravel, road, hybrid)
Rank: 1.69
466
36%
Runner
Rank: 1.80
316
23%
Mountain biker
Rank: 1.97
196
2%
Other (please specify in comment box)
Rank: 2.52
21
4%
User of adaptive recreation equipment
Rank: 3.21
34
866 Respondents
The idea of Asheville Unpaved will need community support, including donations, volunteers for maintenance, and partnerships and sponsorships with organizations. Are you a part of an organization that would be interested in supporting this initiative? Please list your contact information and how you might be able to help.
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
45/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
What gender do you identify as? (Select all that apply). 54%
Female
459
43%
Male
364
3%
Prefer not to say
1%
Non-binary/third gender
8
0%
Other
2
0%
Transgender
0
0%
Prefer to self-describe
0
24
854 Respondents
What is your age? 27% 36-45 20% 56-65 19% 46-55 16% 26-35 13% 66-75 6% Others
944 respondents
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
46/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
What is your race? (Select all that apply). 89%
White
790
7%
Prefer not to answer
63
1%
Some other race or origin
11
1%
Asian
10
1%
American Indian or Alaskan Native
8
1%
Prefer to self-describe
8
0%
Black or African American
4
0%
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0
884 Respondents
Are you of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or of Spanish origin? (Select all that apply). 87%
No, not of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin
670
8%
Prefer not to answer
61
2%
Some other race, ethnicity, or origin
12
1%
Yes, Another Hispanic, Latino/a/x or Spanish origin
11
1%
Yes, Cuban
9
1%
Prefer to self-describe
5
1%
Yes, Mexican, Mexican American, Chicano/a/x
4
0%
Yes, Puerto Rican
2
771 Respondents
Loading more report objects...
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8690?embeddedreport=False
47/47
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
ADA Transition Plan Survey Project Engagement VIEWS
PARTICIPANTS
1,007
251
RESPONSES
COMMENTS
4,955
451
SUBSCRIBERS
51 * In what area of Asheville (or the region) do you live? By answering this question, it helps us make sure we are hearing from people across the City. We won't be able to identify your specific address. You can enter the nearest cross streets in the boxes below; or, using the map, drag the blue point to Asheville and then zoom in and drag it to the approximate location where you live. Toggle Clustering
211
Map data ©2021 Google, INEGI
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
1/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
In what area of Asheville (or the region) do you work? If you are not working, you can skip this question. You can enter the nearest cross streets in the boxes below; or, using the map, drag the blue point to Asheville and then zoom in and drag it to the approximate location where you live. Toggle Clustering
187
2
Map data ©2021 Google, INEGI
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
2/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Rank your top five (5) items by order of importance. (Click your top selections and they will move above and turn blue. You can then drag the blue selections to order your priorities. Then click 'Confirm Priorities'). 81%
Pedestrian sidewalks
Rank: 1.72
162
74%
Greenways and trails
Rank: 1.76
147
59%
Street crossings, including traffic signals
Rank: 3.16
117
41%
Pedestrian curb ramps
Rank: 3.22
81
31%
Access TO bus stops (getting to the bus stop)
Rank: 3.25
61
Rank: 3.47
15
8%
Other (please specify in comment box)
24%
Access AT bus stops (using the bus stop)
Rank: 3.52
48
22%
On-street parking
Rank: 3.72
43
17%
Accessible signage and wayfinding assistance
Rank: 3.88
34
200 Respondents i cannot believe that there isn't a safe place to cross broadway between weaver and chestnut. ! and, even worse, no pedestrian crossing at the 240 bridge/ramp near moog on broadway to get to lexington. super dangerous. 3 months ago
12 Agree
The lack of sidewalks in many parts of Asheville is embarrassing, particularly on bus routes. Merrimon Avenue past Beaver dam and Swannanoa River Road near the municipal golf course come to mind. 3 months ago
9 Agree
Benches and trash service at bus stops 3 months ago
7 Agree
Honestly everything needs work in this city. Limiting to 5 priorities doesn't quite cut it. I couldn't imagine trying to navigate Asheville as someone with mobility limitations. 3 months ago
4 Agree
On street parking that blocks sight of on coming traffic! 3 months ago
3 Agree
Repair and maintenance of current sidewalks, including removing barriers, such as poles in the middle of the sidewalk. 3 months ago
3 Agree
Most streets in Asheville only have sidewalks on one side making it necessary for folks in wheelchairs....low to ground...to have to cross where there are often no crosswalks. Baffles the mind. 3 months ago
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
3 Agree
3/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Bus stops SUCK in Asheville. It's pathetic. A freakin' bench without shelter is NOT a functional bus stop. A sign in the mud without even a bench to sit on IS NOT A BUST STOP! 90% are functionally obsolete. Make them better. Minimal standard should be a bench, with shelter from the elements, and a trash can. And, duh, put them on an ADA concrete pad, not in the goddamn mud. 3 months ago
3 Agree
ADA compliant sidewalks 3 months ago
2 Agree
Sand hill road has many people that walk up and down but no side walks once you reach bear creek area . Very dangerous for bikers and walkers 3 months ago
2 Agree
Interested in pedestrian friendly features, and access to mass transit 3 months ago
2 Agree
Prohibit ALL on street parking in residential areas 3 months ago
2 Agree
Look at population density in an area, and historically neglected areas. Include consideration for conditions that are just beyond the City's limits. For instance, many areas of West Asheville have far more people who need these improvements yet the funding goes to places with the more wealthy and politically connected citizens but without the population density. Look at who is taking this survey - who has time, energy, and belief in giving feedback to city gov't? Who has the city gov't taken care of historically? The loudest voice does not equal the greatest need. 2 months ago
1 Agree
I wish I could click the "agree" button a thousand times for this. I spoke with someone at the city several years ago about making this type of feedback more readily accessible to folks who aren't so connected and engaged. Many of our older residents don't have computers and certainly couldn't navigate this type of thing on a tiny little phone screen - if they even have a smart phone (many don't). Her answer was that those folks should find a way if they want to participate and pointed out that libraries have free computer/internet access. But many have no idea how to use a computer, wouldn't be comfortable doing so, and folks who are older and/or living with disabilities often lack the kind of transportation options needed to take advantage of that service. I prefer to give my feedback online but many would prefer to have a phone number they can call or a paper survey they can mail back. And getting information out to those folks that this type of engagement is even available should be a consideration as well - newspaper, local news, robocall messages or push notifications to phones. 2 months ago
Sidewalks that are unusable (especially for wheelchairs and strollers) due to being too narrow, interrupted by light poles, heaved by roots, parked on by cars pulling half onto them, overhung by shrubs, etc. State Street is a great example of a sidewalk that was completely redone in the last 10 years or so -- just as useless to wheelchairs after as it was before. 2 months ago
1 Agree
Accessible parking and walkway to Hazel Robinson Amphitheatre. It’s a shame the city won’t support the facility for a nice resource to citizens $ tourists. Kinda shady. 3 months ago
1 Agree
More bike lanes 3 months ago 1 Agree
we need more bike lanes 3 months ago
1 Agree
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
4/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Slower traffic in downtown, never APD giving speeding tickets 3 months ago
1 Agree
Bike lanes 3 months ago 1 Agree
Bike Lanes 3 months ago 1 Agree
Other: slower traffic, less traffic one month ago
Sidewalks that do not have utility poles sticking up in the middle of them. one month ago
Connecting greenways to each other so I can get from Reems Creek to downtown via safe pedestrian or bike travel. one month ago
Difficult to narrow to just 5 as all of these are important and challenging obstacles in Asheville for a person like me who uses a wheelchair. one month ago
More signage regarding pet leash laws. one month ago
Patton Avenue needs more safe, accessible crosswalks. There is no safe way to cross Patton at the Sisters of Mercy Urgent Care, even though it's where the sidewalk ends. one month ago
Benches/rest areas one month ago
I do use greenways and parks and would like more access such as wheelchair accessible trails, areas. Maybe more education to the public, most people do not use wheelchairs unless absolutely necessary. there are some that abuse it. also, some can walk a very short distance, but not long distance and then need the chair. people need to understand this and that we are not just trying to take up their space or get in their way. this is our only way to get around. one month ago
monitoring handicap parking. too many drivers use expired, borrowed and even stolen placards. this makes it difficult for people that are truly legit. maybe use pictures or other id like other states. this is truly frustrating to see and experience. one month ago
Bike lanes one month ago
Avl needs more verbal cross-walk cues for the blind. Sidewalks full of poles and guide-wires are perilous for we who use a tap-cane to walk. More concrete sidewalks are not the answer: I favor Avl Unpaved. one month ago
Sidewalks that are free of trash or broken, unlevel tiles one month ago
uneven pavement or obstacles in sidewalk such as poles, parking meters etc that visually impaired or others with physical limitations may trip over one month ago
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
5/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation The gap in sidewalks on New Haw Creek Rd between the Tunnel Rd entrance and Arco Rd continues to frighten me. With sidewalks at each end of this gap, pedestrians routinely walk the 1/4 mile strip without sidewalks. It's scary to see persons of all ages navigating this stretch with vehicles passing by at 40 MPH. 2 months ago
The city needs to replace every tree they've removed and add additional trees. It's very hard to walk "naked" streets in the hot weather. 2 months ago
The city needs to replace the trees they've removed and also add more. It's difficult to walk naked streets in the hot weather. 2 months ago
We submitted a request for a sidewalk six years ago! We walk all around town and there is a definite need for sidewalk repair and sidewalks in general. 2 months ago
Bike paths on major streets to city center 2 months ago
As a bike rider here there have been large improvements over the last 10 years but would like to see more. 2 months ago
Can’t get greenways and trails to #1 spot 2 months ago
I would really encourage Asheville to begin getting cars out of the downtown. Not by making mandates, but by providing park-n-rides where the major highways leading into Asheville meet, in the N, S, E, and West outskirts of the city. The park-n-rides would then have buses come and go every 15 minutes that shuttle people to our downtown. People will quickly realize it's much easier to park in the park -n-rides than it is to find downtown parking. In addition, the city should zone off most areas of downtown parking to be used only for those who work in city or county jobs. People would pay parking fees at the parking garages outside the city, then pay bus fees generating money that stays in Asheville and can be used to get our sewers repaired so there is not so much clogging which adds to the problem of flooding and unclean water from runoff. The city could also invest in roads-skyways that take people from the park n rides into the city. The skyways would be used only by pedestrians, bicycles or an el type train or trolleys, while our current e-buses take people from their neighborhoods to the park -n-rides. Getting cars out of our downtown solves many of the 2030 goals that I read on the city's long term plans-on the website. This plan, with the skyways, reduces car usage which causes 24% of the air pollution in cities in our country. It provides jobs, revenue, and attracts businesses who depend on a workforce that has a fast and reliable method of getting to work. CEO's and workers alike could use the system enabling Asheville to grow without changing our downtown footprint which is so attractive with mom and pop shops. This plan would free up parking so that pedestrian only zones could be established. Shade sails could be put up high between buildings reducing summer heat, providing protection from summer storms and winter winds, and further keeping our downtown weirdly fabulous with buskers, great food, shops and ambiance that is so needed to compete for visitors and relocators as outlying towns are attracting large numbers of relocators after 2020 flooding, hurricanes, and fires. We must get ready now,.....for what will most likely happen as we continue to grow. Thank you to whomever is listening...please pass on my message....I grew up in Ohio, lived in Portland, Oregon for the past 35 yrs. and moved to Asheville 2.5 yrs. ago because I love Asheville and am now retired. You can reach me: Jean Bedore, 503-705-8123 or email: bedorejm@comcast.net. 2 months ago
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
6/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation There are zero sidewalks in and around our neighborhood in South Asheville, and no greenways at all either. South Asheville in general is super lacking in greenways and sidewalks. It would be wonderful and much safer if those existed. Trying to walk up Rock Hill Road for example, is incredibly dangerous. I see kids/teens walking on the side there all the time and people driving have blindspots and come zooming up and down. Access to public low cost transport and equity in accessibility are always high on my priority list too. 2 months ago
Until the Greenway into downtown is completed from Five Points/Montford, there's not safe way to bike into downtown. I'd love to see bike lanes on Broadway, even if this means a narrowing of the car-traffic lanes, which I've almost never seen full. Similarly, bike lanes from Broadway to Riverside, which already much used by runners and cyclists is very dangerous until the bike lanes begin near the Bywater. 2 months ago
More bike lanes 2 months ago
More people with cars and access will complete this survey than those who need the bus. Please prioritize services for our most vulnerable. 2 months ago
Asheville is known for its outdoor attraction and beauty. This should be a bike and walking akk access city/county 2 months ago
Bike friendly roads/paths for commuting across Asheville/Buncombe 2 months ago
No shoulders, no sidewalks Super dangerous 2 months ago
I work in the transportation industry and constantly hear about the difficulties people have navigating the ART system. The primary issue I hear is that the nearest bus stop is very far away or doesn't have a sidewalk leading to/from. This is dangerous in many places for everyone but even more so for those who use wheelchairs or walkers and are vision or hearing impaired. I have also noticed that many of the new sidewalks are tilted to one side, have obstructions like light poles or have landscaping elements that force pedestrians to move to the curb edge (rather than having placed those elements on the road side which would allow pedestrians to stay further away from the road. Additionally, standing/ponding water that doesn't drain properly during a rain leaves pedestrians exposed to large sprays of water from passing vehicles or obscures the surface for those walking on the road due to lack of sidewalks. 2 months ago
connectors and bike lanes to existing greenways 2 months ago
There absolutely needs to be a sidewalk on Lakeshore Drive in north Asheville down to Beaver lake. There’s so much foot traffic and that road is extremely dangerous with a lot of car traffic. I’ve been almost hit multiple times walking down to the lake. 2 months ago
Ada access to the river itself. Ada. Bathrooms at carrier park. Tried to go and the bathrooms by the track were closed and had to use the ramp after trying so hard to find access to a bathroom. Need signs and maps of where you can find a bathroom with running water. Thank you for providing two Some what Ada parking spaces...the terrain is uneven, it’s hard to back out because park behind you...the city employees park in the space while they empty the trash and restock the dog bags, also have noticed people park in the space that is NOT a parking g space that blocks trying to get out of a vehicle. 2 months ago
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
7/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation it is dangerous every single day walking on deaverview road to the bus stops. it’s dangerous every single day driving on deaverview watching out for pedestrians in the road- trash days are the worst since they have to walk further out in the road- rainy days and dark nights are scary. please add sidewalks. 2 months ago
Wyoming needs a sidewalk! There are always children and people with dogs walking down to the park, and drivers use it as a cut-through to get from Biltmore to Tunnel and drive so fast! It's narrow and dangerous. 2 months ago
Buses need to be outfitted with complete sets of wheelchair tie downs and occupant restraint systems which work, and bus drivers should be thoroughly trained in how to safely use them. 2 months ago
Stop catering to tourists and the hotel industry instead of the taxpayers that LIVE here. I have lived here my entire life and sick of being a second class citizen in lieu of everybody from everywhere else. You allow overbuilding, cut down our forests, push our natural resources to their limit and destroy all natural habitat - all the things that actually draw people here in the first place. When is it going to stop when everything is one big blob of asphalt and traffic doesn’t even move anymore? We’re almost there... 2 months ago
Please PLEASE complete the section of sidewalk beginning near the bowling alley on Kenilworth Road all the way to the top of the hill. We have heard over and over that it would be done - and NEVER completed! Almost every day I see people AND KIDS walking, on bikes, even in wheelchairs trying to navigate this area - absolutely ridiculous that this has not been done yet. Also, the power poles have been replaced - and kept in the MIDDLE of the sidewalk making it practically impossible for anyone in a wheelchair, or someone pushing a stroller to navigate Kenilworth Road without having to go into the traffic lane. Many of us have asked FOR YEARS for this to be done - money has even been paid by a couple of developers for the sidewalk - yet it STILL remains unfinished while other much less used sidewalks are built. This is an ADA issue - why can we not get it done? 2 months ago
I am unable to take my wheelchair even on roads with sidewalks throughout asheville because there are light polls right in the middle of the walkway! 2 months ago
Let's be honest here....how many of us are using the bus? I suggest we structure a high level private transit system (slightly higher cost) where people can use the bus stops and NOT sit it urine. 2 months ago
Community parks that you can walk to 2 months ago
No sidewalk access on dangerous curved and narrow road on wood near Parker and sayles 2 months ago
The Amboy Rd. bridge is a glaring continuity issue. We now have what amounts to three seperate greenways that are not connected, yet all are within sight of each other. I know bridges are expensive, but the whole thing seems silly. 2 months ago
There are almost no sidewalks or shoulder in Beaverdam. Almost every time I run/walk on Beaverdam I get buzzed by a car/truck. 2 months ago
Inaccessible pedestrian push buttons. Poor routing and detours in construction zones for pedestrians. Poor snow plowing that blocked ramps, crosswalks and sidewalks. 2 months ago
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
8/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Pedestrian bridge across the French Broad River. 2 months ago
Decreasing the noise pollution caused by nearby interstates and four-lane roads. 2 months ago
Parks we need at park at cedar hill and Pisgah view not more housing. Address the issues with the available housing and improve it not build more on our land. Make more parks that are safe for kids and families 2 months ago
Encourage on street parking in ALL residential areas. 3 months ago
Why in the world would you recommend this? I have a drive on both sides of my house - as many do - why would I park in the street instead of my driveway. 2 months ago
Lack of sidewalks in high pedestrian communities, lack of separated bike lanes on or near city streets, lack of trash and dog waste receptacles. 3 months ago
Repairing / replacing sidewalks especially Merrimon Avenue the entire sidewalk needs to be replaced and street trees and lighting need to be added. 3 months ago
Accessible parking and seating for Hazel Robinson Amphitheatre 3 months ago
We need to leave forest and stop building some many houses in West Asheville. The Wildlife are starting to have no where to go. 3 months ago
Audible signal on Chestnut and Broadway at Five Points 3 months ago
Focus on crosswalks, pedestrian signals, safe crossings. Low cost improvements while funding is tight. 3 months ago
The lack of sidewalks down beaverdam rd. There are so many people who walk in the neighborhoods but no sidewalks to connect them. You can't walk from neighborhoods on beaverdam to the busstop at the merrimon cross road on sidewalks and the road is windy with fast traffic 3 months ago
Get buses and cars out of downtown by offering park n rides in N,S,E,W. Zone for city, county workers, handicapped and downtown residents. This would make downtown more walkable, keep the same footprint, reduce pollution, keep cars from cruising and beeping horns....put shade sails up between buildings. America's Most Enchanting Town! 3 months ago
I feel safer riding a bike in DC and Manhattan as compared to Asheville. I’m not sure exactly what makes it so unsafe, but whatever it is, please fix it. 3 months ago
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
9/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Think about the places you travel. Indicate the difficulty that sidewalk and curb ramp obstacles create as you move around Asheville. Not Not at
No curb ramp where needed.
Applicable
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
all
(I do not
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
experience
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
this) 28%
15%
13%
23%
12%
9%
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
Not
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience this)
Challenging curb
14%
12%
31%
10%
9%
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
Not
too steep, poor
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
turning areas, poor
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience
ramps. For example,
drainage (puddles).
25%
this) Sidewalks in poor
25%
28%
31%
7%
4%
5%
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
Not
example, cracks and
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
broken areas that
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience
condition. For
create obstacles.
this) Sidewalks are too
28%
27%
29%
7%
4%
6%
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
Not
obstacles in the
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
sidewalk. For
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience
narrow or there are
example, utility poles in the middle of a
this)
sidewalk. Signalized roadway
16%
17%
28%
17%
9%
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
Not
accessible features
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
like audible
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience
crossings lack
pedestrian signals or broken, missing and
13%
this)
hard to reach push buttons. Unsignalized
23%
24%
27%
10%
6%
9%
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
Not
with inadequate
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
facilities to cross the
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience
roadway crossings
road. For example, missing or poorly
this)
aligned pedestrian ramps. Skewed or crooked crosswalks markings.
9%
14%
26%
18%
16%
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
17% Not
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience this)
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
10/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Not Not at
Applicable
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
all
(I do not
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
experience
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
this) 30%
Ability to get to bus
20%
15%
17%
12%
6%
stops. For example,
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
Not
no sidewalk access,
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
no place to sit, (no
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience
sidewalk or poor design). Not enough accessible on-street parking.
this) 13%
13%
25%
18%
10%
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
20% Not
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience this)
169 respondents How about a road diet on Broadway from Chestnut to the I-240 bridge? Why are there 4 vehicular lanes here? Let's get bike lanes and/or parallel parking (adding a buffer between the cars and pedestrians much needed!) 3 months ago
12 Agree
Bike lanes are not consistent or sometimes not wide enough and biking in the road can be scary 3 months ago
10 Agree
We need to slow down the traffic on many of the main streets in Asheville 3 months ago
6 Agree
So many sidewalks have poles right in the middle with no ramps nearby to allow for ADA travelers to navigate around them. State Street in particular is a significant pedestrian corridor that forces ADA travelers into the busy, high traffic streets. Many bike lanes simply end at the most inopportune and dangerous places. 3 months ago
5 Agree
No seating, no trash cans, and no covered area at bus stops is a huge problem, but it isn't a problem for me personally, so I didn't rank it. But it still needs to be addressed! 3 months ago
4 Agree
I see many people on Patton Avenue/Smoky Park Highway crossing the road randomly and not using crosswalks. From my understanding, this is one of the most dangerous roads for pedestrians. This and other poorly designed roads need to be overhauled to protect pedestrians. We need more pedestrian only streets downtown. We need more safe pedestrian crossings on roads such as Smoky Park Highway. Get the cars out of downtown. Protect pedestrians. 2 months ago
2 Agree
Why is handicap parking not free in the garages? If it's free on the street, the garages should be too. There are not enough on-street handicap available. 2 months ago
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
2 Agree
11/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Although I do not have mobility challenges, our sidewalks and crosswalks are not sufficiently accessible for many people, including those with mobility challenges, people pushing strollers, etc. There are not enough sidewalks and the existing ones are often too narrow to navigate. It is very common in West Asheville, even on busy side roads such as Virginia Ave, for people to have to walk in the street, which is dangerous considering the volume and speed of traffic. 2 months ago
1 Agree
Not enough emphasis is placed on accessibility. 2 months ago
1 Agree
Sidewalks we need sidewalks and people to only be able to park on one side of the street! There shouldn’t be parking on both sides of pedestrian residential streets as it makes it impossible to see people on foot or to navigate the roads 2 months ago
1 Agree
More benches 3 months ago 1 Agree
Poor drainage on Biltmore between the hospital and charlotte st. 3 months ago
1 Agree
Complete lack of sidewalks or sidewalks on only one side of the road in some places. For example, Depot Street needs a sidewalk from the parking lot across the street from the studios to the new traffic circle. Also, in front of the apartment complex across the street from Green's where there is currently only a dirt path. 3 months ago
1 Agree
roundabout at chestnut and broadway seems like a "no-brainer" 3 months ago
1 Agree
Lack of sidewalks or sidewalk curb ramps means people in wheelchairs have to go in roads, where people driving have trouble seeing something they don’t expect. Very unsafe to get around. one month ago
Need more bike lanes to protect cyclists and have fewer cars on the road one month ago
Asheville is an extremely difficult city to navigate using a wheelchair (especially manual), not only due to the steep and hilly terrain but also due to the deteriorating and pre-ADA pedestrian infrastructure and lack of inclusive accessibility in many places. I have noticed some improvements in and around downtown which is much appreciated but other neighborhoods and parts of the City remain inaccessible and risky to navigate. one month ago
West Gate needs a pedestrian overpass over the highway. I've seen too many people risk their lives entering the highway just to get to the otherside. The bus stop at Westgate near the Fed Ex office is a disgrace. one month ago
We need more safe crosswalks all up and down Patton Ave! one month ago
I'm blind and use a tap-cane to navigate. Between the phone poles, guide-wires, joggers, dogs, etc. I don't feel safe walking in West Avl. We don't need more concrete, but Avl Unpaved. We need more verbal cues at crosswalks citywide. one month ago
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
12/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Sidewalks are not being maintained and cleaned. There is broken glass and used needles everywhere. They are cracked and uneven. one month ago
I moved here from a city with exceptional transportation and sidewalk access — both crucial to neighborhood health and safety. I feel like I've moved to a post-apocalyptic dystopian society where the entire kingdom is crumbling underfoot. Come on Asheville! clean-up your act! Construct sidewalks and bike lanes, mitigate poor rainwater overflow causing flooding, build better infrastructure and fewer hotels, PAVE THE ROADS AND CLEAN UP YOUR DAMN TRASH! 2 months ago
Broken sidewalk system is a huge issue and daily barrier 2 months ago
What’s up with the sidewalk on Haywood Road on the hill going down to the river? There are curbs every 10 ft. No one with a wheelchair could use that sidewalk. And there is no why that land will ever be developed. Fix the sidewalk so it isn’t such a tripping hazard. 2 months ago
As long as we have parking garages conveniently located the on street parking is ok 2 months ago
You should have the general Public shoppers put in their comments after their comments and feedback, 2 months ago
We need to slow down traffic in general and through neighborhoods. Implementing sidewalks on streets that were designed to be mixed use is not a good solution. Propose traffic calming measures that make people drive slower. 2 months ago
I am a newcomer. An urban person, but it is ridiculously difficult to find parking downtown. Kills any desire to go downtown. 3 months ago
if you are urban, then you shouldn't mind walking to downtown 3 months ago
There are too many homes that have no parking and people have to park on the street, which makes it hard to navigate when traveling by vehicle on already narrow streets. 3 months ago
Kenilworth streets are so narrow people can't walk safely let alone us a wheelchair safely. Our downtown should be ped only and parking saved for handicapped, city and gov. workers and those who live downtown. This would eliminate the huge trucks that have taken to cruising, honking, revving their motors and disrupting asheville's beautiful nights. How? Park n rides in N, S, E and W with skyways to downtown. Keeps Asheville small and sweet! 3 months ago
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
13/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
How do you get around on an average day? 71% I have a car and drive 14% I walk or use a wheelchair or other mobility device to get around 6% I have a reliable automobile transportation option, for example, I use a service or have someone who can take me places 5% Other (please specify) 4% I use Asheville's transit system (ART) 0% I use Mountain Mobility
189 respondents biking and walking are also other ways that I get around town 3 months ago
9 Agree
I would bike but it is extremely unsafe, particularly my commute on Biltmore from Biltmore Village to downtown. 3 months ago
4 Agree
Also use Mountain Mobility one month ago
plus Mountain Mobility and walking. one month ago
My boyfriend uses a wheelchair, and you just don’t know how impassible how our city is until you try to get around on wheels like that. Minor cracks to us can cause someone to flip over. Let’s not wait for some one to get hurt, or killed, or the city get another huge lawsuit before we fix our sidewalks. one month ago
and bicycle. one month ago
I also commute by bike across town for work. one month ago
I walk to and from work a lot but when it’s wet I can’t because the grass I have to walk in is so saturated and muddy I don’t want to ruin my shoes so I have to drive. one month ago
I would prefer to bike in town but done feel safe doing so. I run and walk for exercise. I would walk for transportation if there were sidewalks where I live one month ago
I also use a car and drive. Wheelchair accessible parking downtown is extremely limited and practically nonexistent during peak times. one month ago
Could use Mountain Mobility or ART, but on the average day I have an auto available one month ago
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
14/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation I also have a car. one month ago
I work from home and walk to do errands and get serves almost every day. one month ago
I have a car and drive but work with many blind pedestrians who encounter the problems you are discussing one month ago
but I would love to bike and ride the bus more if there was better safe connections between stops and UNCA, downtown etc. one month ago
I also use Mountain Mobility when I need see a specialist in Charlotte or other faraway places. one month ago
My family (wife and 18mo child) and I are trying to do more of our regular trips by bike, but the lack of safe connectors to certain areas of Asheville prevent us from doing all trips. 2 months ago
Bicycle 2 months ago
Would love to bike more there but it is way too dangerous!! 2 months ago
I bike and walk as alternative was of getting around. 2 months ago
Bicycle 2 months ago
biking and walking are how a commute to/from work. Car is utilized for grocery and other travel. 2 months ago
I walk too, even if only from where I am parked to where I am going. 2 months ago
Walk each day to places as well. 2 months ago
I have both a car, bike and walk 2 months ago
Walk a lot as well 2 months ago
I wish I could say that I walked to get groceries, pick up meds, ran other errands as I did in my previous, very pedestrian-friendly town, but Asheville is nothing like that. The only way I would consider walking to the grocery or into the downtown area is if I meandered through neighborhoods to get there, avoiding Merrimon Avenue at all costs. 2 months ago
I also walk and bike as often as possible. 2 months ago
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
15/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation I ride a bike 2 months ago
By foot or by bike. 2 months ago
I use the greenways for exercise. And love them. Thank you for all the RAD improvements! 2 months ago
I’d like to bike more to get around, but need better safe access 2 months ago
I equally 1) walk and 2) have a car and drive to get around on an average day 2 months ago
I prefer to walk and ride a bike, but its so dangerous in this city that it is often not an option and I am forced to drive. thankful to have a car, but would rather not use it as much 2 months ago
I walk where I can when the weather is good and there is daylight. I try to avoid peak times when there is a lot of traffic, but sometimes I choose to drive when the roads are busy even if it is close by. If I can't get where I am going by walking, sometimes because of the condition of the sidewalks, I just drive. 2 months ago
I would bike, but AVL is a straight up nightmare 2 months ago
Bikes 2 months ago
Biking is not an option because it isn’t safe 2 months ago
I work from home so most days I'm walking. 2 months ago
I have a car and walk often 2 months ago
I can walk and take frequent long walks in my neighborhood, but my answers are also informed by my experiences with my wheelchair-bound husband. 2 months ago
I also walk but i cannot ever take my dog or child for fear of being hit by a car as there are no sidewalks in west Asheville at all 2 months ago
I use crutches to walk. Even sidewalks make walking much easier, and safer 2 months ago
I have a car and drive, but would prefer to walk/bike -- would likely sell car if Asheville was more walkable 2 months ago
Am very much a multimodal user. Currently with Covid, working much less and from home, walking is more frequent, but often drive. In non-Covid times I also take the bus. 3 months ago
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
16/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation I do not feel like there are routes where it is safe for me to bike where I need to go 3 months ago
Biking and walking 3 months ago
also bike, run and walk 3 months ago
Biking would be a preferred method but is not an option due to safety of roads and lack of accessible bike lanes. 3 months ago
I WOULD bike if it were safe, but it just isn't in this town. 3 months ago
If we had safer roads/ bike lanes/ sidewalks...maybe more folks would choose biking/ walking as a way to get around...therefore less cars, therefore less pollution, therefore a healthier population...etc. 3 months ago
Bike and Walk 3 months ago
I bike and use a car when I have to 3 months ago
Bike, walk, drive - in that order. 3 months ago
I walk or ride my bike as well. 3 months ago
I also walk to places 3 months ago
I also use ride services but would love to have access to a safe bike route and bus service 3 months ago
Would walk more but there aren't enough benches and restrooms 3 months ago
auto/bike/walk 3 months ago
Our buses are never full. Use buses to take people to park n rides keeping cars out of downtown. Skyways take people and bikes to downtown on trolleys or trams. Rezone downtown for county workers and downtown residents so Asheville becomes the world's most enchanting city! 3 months ago
It would make sense for daily commuters like the city and county workers and employees at other larger businesses to use park and ride and free up parking for others. 2 months ago
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
17/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Keep cars off the streets by providing park n rides in N,S,E, and W. Buses take workers to park n rides where skyway trolleys or trams take people to and from town. Pretty soon people get how easier it is to use than to circle endlessly trying to find parking. Put shade sails up between buildings and zone current spaces for city county workers and downtown residents. Keep Asheville Enchanting. 3 months ago
I also ride my bike. The new bike lanes on Charlotte are great but I find riding my bike from charlotte st at college to Mission to be very scary and Biltmore ave is too narrrow. 3 months ago
If I could bike to work I would, but that would be incredibly unsafe. 3 months ago
I deliberately chose to live in a walkable neighborhood where I can drive or ride the bus to most locations. However, I commute to Haywood County for work (by car - though would love an express bus along I-40 with a stop in Canton and Clyde). 3 months ago
Are there times when you would like to walk or use a mobility device to reach a destination, but you do not because the curb ramps, sidewalks and street crossings conditions present barriers? If so, please indicate your alternative transportation. 65% Yes and I have a car and can drive to places I cannot walk 27% No 4% Yes and I have a reliable transportation option, for example, I use a service or have someone who can take me places 4% Others
181 respondents
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
18/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
What routes/areas should the City prioritize for accessibility improvements? (Click your top selections and they will move above and turn blue. You can then drag the blue selections to order your priorities. Then click 'Confirm Priorities'). In areas with vehicle related safety concerns (including high traffic
62%
Rank: 2.63
93
In areas with higher equity concerns (neighborhoods with barriers thatRank: 2.66
80
roads, higher speed roads or locations with pedestrian crash history)
53%
prevent people from accessing essential needs, opportunities for wellbeing, and their full potential)
63%
Along routes to grocery stores and shopping areas
Rank: 2.87
95
55%
Along routes to parks, libraries or community centers
Rank: 3.04
83
49%
Along routes to schools
Rank: 3.39
74
Rank: 3.50
4
3%
Other (please specify in comment box)
39%
Along transit lines or near transit stops
Rank: 3.69
59
31%
Along routes to healthcare offices and hospitals
Rank: 4.26
47
32%
In residential areas
Rank: 4.44
48
19%
Near public buildings like City Hall or the Health Department
Rank: 5.96
28
151 Respondents DOWNTOWN! Bury utilities if you have to - getting poles out of sidewalks, wider sidewalks everywhere possible, midblock crossings, street trees, and intersections where plenty of people can gather comfortably to wait to cross. 3 months ago
11 Agree
I like the idea of getting rid of electric poles so you have more room on sidewalks. Too many are too narrow for a wheelchair to negotiate. 3 months ago
6 Agree
A frame signage in front of stores used for advertising creates such a barrier. Especially for people who are blind/visually impaired. Not a good universal design ie. pushing strollers, pulling carts. 3 months ago
1 Agree
Restrooms and benches 3 months ago
1 Agree
All of these are obviously important but certainly routes that are frequently used and utilized by pedestrians but remain inaccessible to those with disabilities. one month ago
Show all comments
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
19/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Tell us the places you would like to walk or use a mobility device to get to. Along Broadway to Riverside Drive; on Merrimon (safely - need a buffer between cars and pedestrians!!!!); Swannanoa River Road (either on a greenway or a sidewalk); Tunnel Road (with a buffer between cars and pedestrians!!!) 3 months ago
7 Agree
Smokey park hwy, Patton ave 2 months ago
6 Agree
Merrimon Ave, Lakeside Drive, Tunnel Rd 3 months ago
3 Agree
Would love to walk from sand hill 600 block road to hominy creek greenway and sports complex 3 months ago
3 Agree
Can all of Asheville look like the new RAD? 3 months ago
3 Agree
The City of Asheville is working to identify areas that are high priority for pedestrian facility repairs. Use the map or comment box below to show us specific locations that cause problems when traveling as a pedestrian (including use of mobility devices). To draw a line or add a point, zoom in to your area of interest. Then click the button on the top right, 'Draw Line' or 'Add Point.' Then click on the map to create a line segment or point. When you are done adding points or lines, a comment box will appear; you can add notes to this box or if you make any errors you can click the 'X' on the top right of the comment box to delete and start over.
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
20/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
We encourage you to use the map; however, if it does not work for you, provide your answer here. Indicate the street/route name and beginning/end points. Please be as specific as possible. Johnston Blvd to Haywood Rd.; Leicester Hwy to Patton. Bridge from Amboy Road to Lyman. 3 months ago
7 Agree
cutting brush back along city sidewalks and roads would be a good start. leicester highway , sweeten creek , merrimon, broadway, riverside 2 months ago
5 Agree
Merrion Avenue is a nightmare. the entire length needs to be replaced, the driveway aprons are not ADA compliant, the concrete is broken, cracked, there are utility poles in the way. there needs to be better street lighting to make it safe at night 3 months ago
2 Agree
Between Amboy, Biltmore Village, Tunnel Road, and Fairview, along Swannanoa River 3 months ago
2 Agree
Hominy creek road between the greenways 2 months ago
1 Agree
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
21/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
I am an individual that has functional needs or disabilities affecting my ability to use the streets, sidewalks, trails, or transit system in Asheville. The things that affect me include: (Select all that apply) 78%
Does not apply
98
17%
Walking
21
7%
Moving
9
5%
Breathing
6
4%
Vision
5
3%
Hearing
4
3%
Cognitive abilities (thinking or focus)
4
2%
Other (please specify)
2
126 Respondents Wheelchair user, so adequate sidewalks and curb ramps are essential. But shucks, even people with strollers have a hard time! 3 months ago
4 Agree
Why does Asheville continually rank as the most dangerous city for pedestrians, yet keeps on approving mega developments without consideration of the infrastructure needs and geographical limitations? It seems Asheville's motto is "We're on the road to nowhere." We seem to value roads more than the destination and definitely more than the safety of pedestrians and cyclists. 2 months ago
2 Agree
I am a strong supporter of accommodations for aging in place and with pedestrian improvements North Asheville has the potential to be a great area for older adults or those unable to drive and I am very cognizant of these challenging whether they apply to me. So, while this does not currently apply it may in the future. 3 months ago
2 Agree
Stamina while walking, so distance is my main issue. 3 months ago
2 Agree
Cane user for walking due to mobility challenges. Too many ramps and driveways have slopes that are severe and I fear for injury or falling into traffic. 2 months ago
Show all comments
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
1 Agree
22/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
I am related to, or care for, an individual that has functional needs or disabilities affecting their ability to use the streets, sidewalks, trails, or transit system in Asheville. The things that affect them include: (Select all that apply) 68%
Does not apply
84
24%
Walking
30
12%
Moving
15
7%
Hearing
8
7%
Vision
8
7%
Cognitive abilities (thinking or focus)
8
6%
Breathing
7
0%
Other (please specify)
0
123 Respondents I am a senior and can see in the future the need for having better sidewalks 2 months ago
1 Agree
It is very difficult to get around downtown using a wheelchair. Sidewalks and curb ramps are in bad shape and many of the curb ramps are too steep. 2 months ago
1 Agree
My boyfriend has a spinal cord injury and uses a wheelchair. one month ago
Parent to a young child. 3 months ago
children going to school or walking to park 2 months ago
Show all comments
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
23/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Please tell us if you use a smartphone to assist you with your travel as a pedestrian (including using mobility devices). If so, what services do you use? (Select all that apply). 74%
Yes, for mapping and directions
26%
Yes, for mapping to see if sidewalks or trails are present
35
21%
Yes, for bus schedules or stop locations
28
13%
No, I prefer not to use one
17
100
8%
Yes, to check terrain
11
6%
No, I don't have one
8
1%
Yes, to use apps that provide sighted assistance
2
1%
Other tool
2
136 Respondents Please don't let NCDOT do what others are doing and having people rely on smart phone apps to connect to cars and traffic signals. If the phone won't regularly work properly with earbuds, there is no way it will work with their primitive technology. 2 months ago
2 Agree
I often use the Asheville App to send comments on areas that need maintenance. 3 months ago
1 Agree
Use a smartphone occasionally to confirm a location: Have I arrived at my destination? Where exactly did the neighbor see a bear? one month ago
I don't use a smart phone because a smart phone with any kind of mobility app on it will pull my attention away from my cane and my environment, and those are the two primary mobility devices to keep me safe. one month ago
Use phone, just not for above features. We use the Asheville App to report sidewalk issues. one month ago
Show all comments
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
24/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
What are the most effective ways for you to receive information on upcoming events, announcements, projects, or general information about the ADA Transition Plan? (Select all that apply). 64%
Email notifications
98
52%
Social Media
80
26%
Press release
40
16%
City of Asheville Pedestrian web page and tools
24
6%
2%
Public meetings
9
Emails to disability groups (if you have a suggested contact, please list that in the comment box below)
3
2%
Other
3
0%
Brochures
0
153 Respondents VIP Support Group (c/o Judy Davis) one month ago
NC Spinal Cord Injury Association (NCSCIA.org) Spinal Cord Injury Support Group - meets once a month at Care Partners (Debbie Johnson, Physical Therapist) one month ago
I found out about this survey through Nextdoor post. 2 months ago
Text one month ago
Avl Commission for the Blind, Paula Springer one month ago
Show all comments
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
25/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
What gender do you identify as? (Select all that apply). 57%
Female
89
39%
Male
61
3%
Prefer not to say
5
1%
Non-binary/third gender
2
0%
Transgender
0
0%
Other
0
0%
Prefer to self-describe
0
157 Respondents
What is your age? 26% 36-45 20% 56-65 17% 26-35 17% 46-55 13% 66-75 3% Over 75 4% Others
164 respondents
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
26/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
What is your race? (Select all that apply). 88%
White
139
6%
Prefer not to answer
9
3%
Some other race or origin
4
2%
Black or African American
3
1%
American Indian or Alaskan Native
2
1%
Asian
2
1%
Prefer to self-describe
1
0%
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0
158 Respondents
Are you of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or of Spanish origin? (Select all that apply). 89%
No, not of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin
131
6%
Prefer not to answer
9
2%
Yes, Another Hispanic, Latino/a/x or Spanish origin
3
1%
Yes, Cuban
2
1%
Yes, Mexican, Mexican American, Chicano/a/x
1
1%
Some other race, ethnicity, or origin
1
1%
Prefer to self-describe
1
0%
Yes, Puerto Rican
0
148 Respondents
Loading more report objects...
https://publicinput.com/Reporting/ReportPreview/8689?embeddedreport=False
27/27
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
ADA Transition Plan Survey - Disabled Respondents * In what area of Asheville (or the region) do you live? By answering this question, it helps us make sure we are hearing from people across the City. We won't be able to identify your specific address. You can enter the nearest cross streets in the boxes below; or, using the map, drag the blue point to Asheville and then zoom in and drag it to the approximate location where you live. Toggle Clustering
211
Map data ©2021 Google, INEGI
https://publicinput.com/report?id=8338
1/19
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
In what area of Asheville (or the region) do you work? If you are not working, you can skip this question. You can enter the nearest cross streets in the boxes below; or, using the map, drag the blue point to Asheville and then zoom in and drag it to the approximate location where you live. Toggle Clustering
187
2
Map data ©2021 Google, INEGI
https://publicinput.com/report?id=8338
2/19
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Filtered by Participant Segment
All participants
Rank your top five (5) items by order of importance. (Click your top selections and they will move above and turn blue. You can then drag the blue selections to order your priorities. Then click 'Confirm Priorities'). 10%
On-street parking
Rank: 1.00
2
70%
Pedestrian sidewalks
Rank: 2.14
14
45%
Street crossings, including traffic signals
Rank: 2.67
9
30%
Access TO bus stops (getting to the bus stop)
Rank: 2.67
6
60%
Pedestrian curb ramps
Rank: 2.83
12
50%
Greenways and trails
Rank: 2.90
10
20%
Access AT bus stops (using the bus stop)
Rank: 3.25
4
30%
Accessible signage and wayfinding assistance
Rank: 3.33
6
30%
Other (please specify in comment box)
Rank: 3.50
6
20 Respondents Most streets in Asheville only have sidewalks on one side making it necessary for folks in wheelchairs....low to ground...to have to cross where there are often no crosswalks. Baffles the mind. 3 months ago
3 Agree
Bus stops SUCK in Asheville. It's pathetic. A freakin' bench without shelter is NOT a functional bus stop. A sign in the mud without even a bench to sit on IS NOT A BUST STOP! 90% are functionally obsolete. Make them better. Minimal standard should be a bench, with shelter from the elements, and a trash can. And, duh, put them on an ADA concrete pad, not in the goddamn mud. 3 months ago
3 Agree
ADA compliant sidewalks 3 months ago
2 Agree
Sidewalks that are unusable (especially for wheelchairs and strollers) due to being too narrow, interrupted by light poles, heaved by roots, parked on by cars pulling half onto them, overhung by shrubs, etc. State Street is a great example of a sidewalk that was completely redone in the last 10 years or so -- just as useless to wheelchairs after as it was before. 2 months ago
1 Agree
Other: slower traffic, less traffic one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=8338
3/19
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Sidewalks that do not have utility poles sticking up in the middle of them. one month ago
Difficult to narrow to just 5 as all of these are important and challenging obstacles in Asheville for a person like me who uses a wheelchair. one month ago
I do use greenways and parks and would like more access such as wheelchair accessible trails, areas. Maybe more education to the public, most people do not use wheelchairs unless absolutely necessary. there are some that abuse it. also, some can walk a very short distance, but not long distance and then need the chair. people need to understand this and that we are not just trying to take up their space or get in their way. this is our only way to get around. one month ago
monitoring handicap parking. too many drivers use expired, borrowed and even stolen placards. this makes it difficult for people that are truly legit. maybe use pictures or other id like other states. this is truly frustrating to see and experience. one month ago
Avl needs more verbal cross-walk cues for the blind. Sidewalks full of poles and guide-wires are perilous for we who use a tap-cane to walk. More concrete sidewalks are not the answer: I favor Avl Unpaved. one month ago
Sidewalks that are free of trash or broken, unlevel tiles one month ago
I would really encourage Asheville to begin getting cars out of the downtown. Not by making mandates, but by providing park-n-rides where the major highways leading into Asheville meet, in the N, S, E, and West outskirts of the city. The park-n-rides would then have buses come and go every 15 minutes that shuttle people to our downtown. People will quickly realize it's much easier to park in the park -n-rides than it is to find downtown parking. In addition, the city should zone off most areas of downtown parking to be used only for those who work in city or county jobs. People would pay parking fees at the parking garages outside the city, then pay bus fees generating money that stays in Asheville and can be used to get our sewers repaired so there is not so much clogging which adds to the problem of flooding and unclean water from runoff. The city could also invest in roads-skyways that take people from the park n rides into the city. The skyways would be used only by pedestrians, bicycles or an el type train or trolleys, while our current e-buses take people from their neighborhoods to the park -n-rides. Getting cars out of our downtown solves many of the 2030 goals that I read on the city's long term plans-on the website. This plan, with the skyways, reduces car usage which causes 24% of the air pollution in cities in our country. It provides jobs, revenue, and attracts businesses who depend on a workforce that has a fast and reliable method of getting to work. CEO's and workers alike could use the system enabling Asheville to grow without changing our downtown footprint which is so attractive with mom and pop shops. This plan would free up parking so that pedestrian only zones could be established. Shade sails could be put up high between buildings reducing summer heat, providing protection from summer storms and winter winds, and further keeping our downtown weirdly fabulous with buskers, great food, shops and ambiance that is so needed to compete for visitors and relocators as outlying towns are attracting large numbers of relocators after 2020 flooding, hurricanes, and fires. We must get ready now,.....for what will most likely happen as we continue to grow. Thank you to whomever is listening...please pass on my message....I grew up in Ohio, lived in Portland, Oregon for the past 35 yrs. and moved to Asheville 2.5 yrs. ago because I love Asheville and am now retired. You can reach me: Jean Bedore, 503-705-8123 or email: bedorejm@comcast.net. 2 months ago
Ada access to the river itself. Ada. Bathrooms at carrier park. Tried to go and the bathrooms by the track were closed and had to use the ramp after trying so hard to find access to a bathroom. Need signs and maps of where you can find a bathroom with running water. Thank you for providing two Some what Ada parking spaces...the terrain is uneven, it’s hard to back out because park behind you...the city employees park in the space while they empty the trash and restock the dog bags, also have noticed people park in the space that is NOT a parking g space that blocks trying to get out of a vehicle. 2 months ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=8338
4/19
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Inaccessible pedestrian push buttons. Poor routing and detours in construction zones for pedestrians. Poor snow plowing that blocked ramps, crosswalks and sidewalks. 2 months ago
Repairing / replacing sidewalks especially Merrimon Avenue the entire sidewalk needs to be replaced and street trees and lighting need to be added. 3 months ago
Audible signal on Chestnut and Broadway at Five Points 3 months ago
Get buses and cars out of downtown by offering park n rides in N,S,E,W. Zone for city, county workers, handicapped and downtown residents. This would make downtown more walkable, keep the same footprint, reduce pollution, keep cars from cruising and beeping horns....put shade sails up between buildings. America's Most Enchanting Town! 3 months ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=8338
5/19
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Filtered by Participant Segment
All participants
Think about the places you travel. Indicate the difficulty that sidewalk and curb ramp obstacles create as you move around Asheville. Not Not at
No curb ramp where needed.
Applicable
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
all
(I do not
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
experience
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
this) 11%
47%
16%
16%
-
11%
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
Not
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience this)
Challenging curb
35%
18%
29%
-
6%
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
Not
too steep, poor
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
turning areas, poor
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience
ramps. For example,
drainage (puddles).
12%
this) Sidewalks in poor
50%
22%
22%
-
6%
-
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
Not
example, cracks and
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
broken areas that
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience
condition. For
create obstacles.
this) Sidewalks are too
58%
21%
16%
5%
-
-
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
Not
obstacles in the
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
sidewalk. For
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience
narrow or there are
example, utility poles in the middle of a
this)
sidewalk. Signalized roadway
31%
31%
12%
12%
6%
6%
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
Not
accessible features
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
like audible
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience
crossings lack
pedestrian signals or broken, missing and
this)
hard to reach push buttons. Unsignalized
32%
26%
26%
11%
5%
-
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
Not
with inadequate
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
facilities to cross the
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience
roadway crossings
road. For example, missing or poorly
this)
aligned pedestrian ramps.
https://publicinput.com/report?id=8338
6/19
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Not Not at
Skewed or crooked crosswalks markings.
Applicable
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
all
(I do not
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
experience
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
this) 11%
21%
11%
37%
16%
5%
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
Not
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience this)
Ability to get to bus
39%
6%
11%
17%
-
stops. For example,
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
Not
no sidewalk access,
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
no place to sit, (no
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience
sidewalk or poor
28%
design). Not enough accessible on-street parking.
this) 25%
15%
15%
20%
5%
Extremely
Very
Somewhat
No So
Not at
20% Not
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
Difficult
all
Applicable
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Barrier
Difficult
(I do not
Barrier
experience this)
20 respondents How about a road diet on Broadway from Chestnut to the I-240 bridge? Why are there 4 vehicular lanes here? Let's get bike lanes and/or parallel parking (adding a buffer between the cars and pedestrians much needed!) 3 months ago
12 Agree
Why is handicap parking not free in the garages? If it's free on the street, the garages should be too. There are not enough on-street handicap available. 2 months ago
2 Agree
Not enough emphasis is placed on accessibility. 2 months ago
1 Agree
Lack of sidewalks or sidewalk curb ramps means people in wheelchairs have to go in roads, where people driving have trouble seeing something they don’t expect. Very unsafe to get around. one month ago
Asheville is an extremely difficult city to navigate using a wheelchair (especially manual), not only due to the steep and hilly terrain but also due to the deteriorating and pre-ADA pedestrian infrastructure and lack of inclusive accessibility in many places. I have noticed some improvements in and around downtown which is much appreciated but other neighborhoods and parts of the City remain inaccessible and risky to navigate. one month ago
I'm blind and use a tap-cane to navigate. Between the phone poles, guide-wires, joggers, dogs, etc. I don't feel safe walking in West Avl. We don't need more concrete, but Avl Unpaved. We need more verbal cues at crosswalks citywide. one month ago
Sidewalks are not being maintained and cleaned. There is broken glass and used needles everywhere. They are cracked and uneven. one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=8338
7/19
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation You should have the general Public shoppers put in their comments after their comments and feedback, 2 months ago
Kenilworth streets are so narrow people can't walk safely let alone us a wheelchair safely. Our downtown should be ped only and parking saved for handicapped, city and gov. workers and those who live downtown. This would eliminate the huge trucks that have taken to cruising, honking, revving their motors and disrupting asheville's beautiful nights. How? Park n rides in N, S, E and W with skyways to downtown. Keeps Asheville small and sweet! 3 months ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=8338
8/19
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Filtered by Participant Segment
All participants
How do you get around on an average day? 42% I walk or use a wheelchair or other mobility device to get around 42% I have a car and drive 16% I have a reliable automobile transportation option, for example, I use a service or have someone who can take me places 0% Others
19 respondents Also use Mountain Mobility one month ago
plus Mountain Mobility and walking. one month ago
My boyfriend uses a wheelchair, and you just don’t know how impassible how our city is until you try to get around on wheels like that. Minor cracks to us can cause someone to flip over. Let’s not wait for some one to get hurt, or killed, or the city get another huge lawsuit before we fix our sidewalks. one month ago
I also use a car and drive. Wheelchair accessible parking downtown is extremely limited and practically nonexistent during peak times. one month ago
I also use Mountain Mobility when I need see a specialist in Charlotte or other faraway places. one month ago
I can walk and take frequent long walks in my neighborhood, but my answers are also informed by my experiences with my wheelchair-bound husband. 2 months ago
Our buses are never full. Use buses to take people to park n rides keeping cars out of downtown. Skyways take people and bikes to downtown on trolleys or trams. Rezone downtown for county workers and downtown residents so Asheville becomes the world's most enchanting city! 3 months ago
Keep cars off the streets by providing park n rides in N,S,E, and W. Buses take workers to park n rides where skyway trolleys or trams take people to and from town. Pretty soon people get how easier it is to use than to circle endlessly trying to find parking. Put shade sails up between buildings and zone current spaces for city county workers and downtown residents. Keep Asheville Enchanting. 3 months ago
I deliberately chose to live in a walkable neighborhood where I can drive or ride the bus to most locations. However, I commute to Haywood County for work (by car - though would love an express bus along I-40 with a stop in Canton and Clyde). 3 months ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=8338
9/19
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Filtered by Participant Segment
All participants
Are there times when you would like to walk or use a mobility device to reach a destination, but you do not because the curb ramps, sidewalks and street crossings conditions present barriers? If so, please indicate your alternative transportation. 50% Yes and I have a car and can drive to places I cannot walk 23% Yes and I have a reliable transportation option, for example, I use a service or have someone who can take me places 18% No 5% Yes and I use Mountain Mobility 5% Yes and I use Asheville's transit system (ART) 0% Other (please specify)
22 respondents
https://publicinput.com/report?id=8338
10/19
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Filtered by Participant Segment
All participants
What routes/areas should the City prioritize for accessibility improvements? (Click your top selections and they will move above and turn blue. You can then drag the blue selections to order your priorities. Then click 'Confirm Priorities'). 6%
Other (please specify in comment box)
Rank: 1.00
1
39%
Along routes to parks, libraries or community centers
Rank: 2.29
7
61%
Along routes to grocery stores and shopping areas
Rank: 2.45
11
In areas with vehicle related safety concerns (including high traffic
Rank: 2.89
9
Rank: 3.43
7
In areas with higher equity concerns (neighborhoods with barriers thatRank: 4.22
9
50%
39%
50%
roads, higher speed roads or locations with pedestrian crash history)
Along transit lines or near transit stops
prevent people from accessing essential needs, opportunities for wellbeing, and their full potential)
33%
Near public buildings like City Hall or the Health Department
Rank: 4.33
6
28%
Along routes to schools
Rank: 4.40
5
39%
Along routes to healthcare offices and hospitals
Rank: 5.29
7
28%
In residential areas
Rank: 6.00
5
18 Respondents DOWNTOWN! Bury utilities if you have to - getting poles out of sidewalks, wider sidewalks everywhere possible, midblock crossings, street trees, and intersections where plenty of people can gather comfortably to wait to cross. 3 months ago
11 Agree
This is a great idea. this it the only city I have lived it that the City did not require all utilities to be placed underground 3 months ago
1 Agree
A frame signage in front of stores used for advertising creates such a barrier. Especially for people who are blind/visually impaired. Not a good universal design ie. pushing strollers, pulling carts. 3 months ago
1 Agree
All of these are obviously important but certainly routes that are frequently used and utilized by pedestrians but remain inaccessible to those with disabilities. one month ago
Downtown sidewalks are dangerous. one month ago
People are subdividing land into micro plots — walkability not keeping pace with relentless increase in new residents. one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=8338
11/19
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation While I am happy with the new Greenway around the RAD, it needs to be paved in spots and have drainage in spots near the river. I was nearly injured today due to the mud. I'm blind and this was an unpleasant surprise. one month ago
It is important to improve accessibility in all of these areas. 3 months ago
Loading options for All participants
Tell us the places you would like to walk or use a mobility device to get to. Along Broadway to Riverside Drive; on Merrimon (safely - need a buffer between cars and pedestrians!!!!); Swannanoa River Road (either on a greenway or a sidewalk); Tunnel Road (with a buffer between cars and pedestrians!!!) 3 months ago
7 Agree
Downtown businesses and restaurants 3 months ago
1 Agree
Crossing Chestnut and Broadway to access grocery stores in Five Points area. 3 months ago
1 Agree
The other side of Kenilworth Rd and up the connecting side streets. All along Kenilworth Rd from Tunnel Rd to Biltmore Ave. one month ago
the post office my drugstore my talking ATM where I vote a couple of grocery stores one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=8338
12/19
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
The City of Asheville is working to identify areas that are high priority for pedestrian facility repairs. Use the map or comment box below to show us specific locations that cause problems when traveling as a pedestrian (including use of mobility devices). To draw a line or add a point, zoom in to your area of interest. Then click the button on the top right, 'Draw Line' or 'Add Point.' Then click on the map to create a line segment or point. When you are done adding points or lines, a comment box will appear; you can add notes to this box or if you make any errors you can click the 'X' on the top right of the comment box to delete and start over.
Map data ©2021 Google
We encourage you to use the map; however, if it does not work for you, provide your answer here. Indicate the street/route name and beginning/end points. Please be as specific as possible. Johnston Blvd to Haywood Rd.; Leicester Hwy to Patton. Bridge from Amboy Road to Lyman. 3 months ago
7 Agree
cutting brush back along city sidewalks and roads would be a good start. leicester highway , sweeten creek , merrimon, broadway, riverside 2 months ago
5 Agree
Merrion Avenue is a nightmare. the entire length needs to be replaced, the driveway aprons are not ADA compliant, the concrete is broken, cracked, there are utility poles in the way. there needs to be better street lighting to make it safe at night 3 months ago
2 Agree
Between Amboy, Biltmore Village, Tunnel Road, and Fairview, along Swannanoa River 3 months ago
2 Agree
Hominy creek road between the greenways 2 months ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=8338
1 Agree
13/19
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Filtered by Participant Segment
All participants
I am an individual that has functional needs or disabilities affecting my ability to use the streets, sidewalks, trails, or transit system in Asheville. The things that affect me include: (Select all that apply) 79%
Walking
15
37%
Moving
7
26%
Vision
5
21%
Breathing
4
11%
Cognitive abilities (thinking or focus)
2
11%
Other (please specify)
2
5%
Hearing
1
5%
Does not apply
1
19 Respondents Wheelchair user, so adequate sidewalks and curb ramps are essential. But shucks, even people with strollers have a hard time! 3 months ago
4 Agree
Stamina while walking, so distance is my main issue. 3 months ago
2 Agree
Cane user for walking due to mobility challenges. Too many ramps and driveways have slopes that are severe and I fear for injury or falling into traffic. 2 months ago
1 Agree
Wheelchair use is difficult downtown because of holes/gaps/cracks/poorly designed and steep curb cuts. 3 months ago
1 Agree
I hope that you are looking at the responses of disabled individuals' separately from non-disabled individuals. Disabled voices should be highlighted, as disabled people have much greater awareness of what is currently lacking in our community. 3 months ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=8338
Show all comments
1 Agree
14/19
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Filtered by Participant Segment
All participants
I am related to, or care for, an individual that has functional needs or disabilities affecting their ability to use the streets, sidewalks, trails, or transit system in Asheville. The things that affect them include: (Select all that apply) 54%
Walking
7
46%
Moving
6
38%
Does not apply
5
23%
Breathing
3
15%
Hearing
2
15%
Vision
2
15%
Cognitive abilities (thinking or focus)
2
0%
Other (please specify)
0
13 Respondents My boyfriend has a spinal cord injury and uses a wheelchair. one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=8338
15/19
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Filtered by Participant Segment
All participants
Please tell us if you use a smartphone to assist you with your travel as a pedestrian (including using mobility devices). If so, what services do you use? (Select all that apply). 53%
Yes, for mapping and directions
9
29%
Yes, for mapping to see if sidewalks or trails are present
5
18%
Yes, for bus schedules or stop locations
3
12%
Yes, to check terrain
2
12%
No, I prefer not to use one
2
12%
No, I don't have one
2
12%
Other tool
2
6%
Yes, to use apps that provide sighted assistance
1
17 Respondents Please don't let NCDOT do what others are doing and having people rely on smart phone apps to connect to cars and traffic signals. If the phone won't regularly work properly with earbuds, there is no way it will work with their primitive technology. 2 months ago
2 Agree
Use a smartphone occasionally to confirm a location: Have I arrived at my destination? Where exactly did the neighbor see a bear? one month ago
I don't use a smart phone because a smart phone with any kind of mobility app on it will pull my attention away from my cane and my environment, and those are the two primary mobility devices to keep me safe. one month ago
Smartphones are too complicated; sight-based tech, not very helpful to the blind. one month ago
Use phone, just not for above features. We use the Asheville App to report sidewalk issues. one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=8338
Show all comments
16/19
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Loading options for All participants
What are the most effective ways for you to receive information on upcoming events, announcements, projects, or general information about the ADA Transition Plan? (Select all that apply). 80%
Email notifications
35%
Social Media
7
20%
Press release
4
15%
Public meetings
3
10%
Other
2
5%
16
Emails to disability groups (if you have a suggested contact, please list that in the comment box below)
1
0%
City of Asheville Pedestrian web page and tools
0
0%
Brochures
0
20 Respondents VIP Support Group (c/o Judy Davis) one month ago
Text one month ago
Avl Commission for the Blind, Paula Springer one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=8338
17/19
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Loading options for All participants
What gender do you identify as? (Select all that apply). 60%
Female
30%
Male
12
6
5%
Non-binary/third gender
1
5%
Prefer not to say
1
0%
Transgender
0
0%
Other
0
0%
Prefer to self-describe
0
20 Respondents
Filtered by Participant Segment
All participants
What is your age? 43% 56-65 26% 36-45 13% 46-55 13% 66-75 4% 18-25 0% Others
23 respondents
https://publicinput.com/report?id=8338
18/19
2/23/2021
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Loading options for All participants
What is your race? (Select all that apply). 74%
White
14
5%
Asian
1
5%
Black or African American
1
5%
Some other race or origin
1
5%
Prefer not to answer
1
5%
Prefer to self-describe
1
0%
American Indian or Alaskan Native
0
0%
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0
19 Respondents
Loading more report objects...
https://publicinput.com/report?id=8338
19/19
Close the GAP Project Network Survey An online survey was hosted from August 25 - October 31, 2021 to collect community input on a draft network of recommendations for walking and greenway needs. A series of maps proposed a citywide network of sidewalk repairs, ADA upgrades, completion of missing sidewalk sections and greenway links. The survey asked users to share what streets they felt were overlooked, to rank key greenway segments, and to share any remaining feedback. This survey was promoted through the City’s Communications and Public Engagement Department; staff and the project team presented the survey to several committees of the City; and City staff led targeted outreach to Asheville neighborhoods at this intermediate stage of the project. The following summary follows the document ‘2021-11-12 GAP Survey Responses_COA.xlsx’. Each tab in the spreadsheet references the following sections.
About You A total of 1,636 unique views were made to the project network survey site in the time that the survey was open for feedback and there were 1,164 responses to the surveys. The following outlines the demographics of the survey respondents (this was not a required question): ● ● ●
89% White (City Demographics: 83% White) 59% Female (City Demographics: 52.2% Female) 79% Not Hispanic, Latino/a/x or Spanish (City Demographics: 77.9% Not Hispanic, Latino/a/x or Spanish)
Walking Needs There were 170 responses to the pedestrian network map, which resulted in 28 changes or additions to the priority network map. These are captured in the document ‘2021-11-12 GAP Survey Responses_COA.xlsx’ with Internal Notes that suggest ‘Add’, ‘Revise existing line’ or ‘Revise existing score’ (cells are shown in pink).
Greenway Needs A total of 412 rankings were provided for the greenway network map, which helped prioritize projects. Respondents were asked to rank projects on a scale of 1-5, from which a list of medium-high priority projects were identified (based solely on community feedback). Since the Greenway Spines are the highest priority and critical to the network, the decision was made to have the public only weigh in on the Arterial Greenways and Neighborhood Greenways. The results from the Walking and Greenway Needs sections were incorporated into the overall ranking process.
Final Thoughts Comments in this section of the survey were reviewed for additional project considerations and general feedback. A total of 98 open-ended comments were received.
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Close the GAP Community Opinion Survey Project Engagement VIEWS
PARTICIPANTS
RESPONSES
COMMENTS
1,953
519
4,216
471
* Did you watch the overview video? If not, please scroll back up. 5% No
95% Yes 518 respondents
STEP 2: On a scale of 1 - 10, how much do you support the proposed Greenway Spine Network? Average
1 (do not support)
10 (it's fantastic)
STEP 2: On a scale of 1 - 10, how much do you support the proposed Arterial Greenway Network? Average
1 (do not support)
10 (it's fantastic)
STEP 2: On a scale of 1 - 10, how much do you support the proposed Neighborhood Greenway Network? Average
1 (do not support)
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
10 (it's fantastic)
1/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Use this space if you would like to make a comment on the greenway network. I support any improvement that makes the city more friendly to bikers and pedestrians. one month ago
34 Agree
I am in support as long as it does not require access to private property! one month ago
16 Agree
How would you like a greenway going through your yard? In some neighborhoods that is what is being proposed. one month ago
6 Agree
BIke and pedestrian access and bus lines are the best solution to ease vehicle-crowded roads. They also provides access to jobs for many who cannot afford cars. one month ago
30 Agree
Needs improvement one month ago 4 Agree
I think this wotk has been done very well. I support it. one month ago
1 Agree
I DO NOT WANT A GREENWAY RUNNING THROUGH HAPPY VALLEY. OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS EASY TO WALK THROUGH VIA THE EXISTING ROADS. PUTTING A GREENWAY IN IS NEITHER WANTED OR NEEDED. IT IS A WASTE OF TAX DOLLARS one month ago
16 Agree
I am deeply concerned about making a greenway that encourages people to walk through people's yards one month ago
15 Agree
This goes right through people's yards in the Happy Valley area. I don't approve of this. one month ago
14 Agree
I DO NOT WANT A GREENWAY GOING THROUGH HAPPY VALLEY. IT IS NEITHER WANTED OR NEEDED. one month ago
14 Agree
I do not support the Bullman Masters Park Greenway in Upper Haw Creek. It passes diagonally through the Happy Valley neighborhood disrupting current neighborhood activities and benefits. one month ago
13 Agree
I am strongly opposed to any proposal that includes greenways in the Happy Valley Subdivision, including adjacent properties! It's ABSURD this initiative is underway, without informing affected owners one month ago
13 Agree
I strongly oppose any sort of initiative that could potentially force a private property owner to give up a portion of their property for the purposes of this project! one month ago
13 Agree
I disagree with the arterial trails planned through the Happy Valley property shown in Map ID# A9. Section A9 is labelled as "Contingent on Landowner Support". Being a landowner, I do not support. one month ago
13 Agree
This is an absolutely stupid idea. This greenway network runs through private property that is actually in people's back yards. This will become a throughfare for the homeless. one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
13 Agree
2/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation I am concerned about what is proposed for Happy Valley . The neighborhood is already easily walkable - public paths through private yards seems a bit much. What about the sidewalks for New Haw C Rd?? one month ago
12 Agree
I do not support the Bullman Masters Park Greenway in Haw Creek. It bisects the Happy Valley neighborhood disrupting current neighborhood activities and characteristics. one month ago
11 Agree
A sidewalk along the New Haw Creek roadway would be better for the neighborhood. one month ago
11 Agree
Another waste of taxpayer money. Asheville is no longer safe due to the homeless drug users growing daily. It's not safe to use any greenspace or Greenway. Fix the issue you all have caused. one month ago
11 Agree
Hey Madison! Surprised to see you here. I thought you were moving to the 13th district? *waves goodbye* one month ago
4 Agree
NO WAY! NO "CLOSE THE GAP!" We will fight you all the way! With the multitude of homeless, mentally ill, drugs, drug dealers and crime rate you want to allow people into Haw Creek neighborhoods! NO!! one month ago
10 Agree
I agree with the spine and neighborhood projects. However, I strongly disagree with the arterial trails planned through people's private property in areas that needs sidewalks, not trails. one month ago
10 Agree
I am concerned that neighborhood yards will have strangers walking through them one month ago
10 Agree
This is a poor format for a survey. The bars don’t work properly and I don’t know what you think I have rated them for. It is also a very vague explanation.More clear info is needed. Where,when,how? one month ago
10 Agree
Yes, I don’t want to come off as not being an advocate for greeenways, I’m just concerned for the areas left unaddressed. one month ago
1 Agree
There are no connections to help get residents north of smokey park highway in candler onto any of the county or city greenways. Those greenways are most accessible for more affluent residents one month ago
10 Agree
Hoped for greenway or accessibility from city boundary line at New Leicester, to connect people to the West AVL Rails trail. Increased bicycle & pedestrian access is long overdue. Worthy $$. one month ago
9 Agree
I live in Haw Creek. How are you going to convince property owners to give up part of their property and then have to deal with strangers walking through. I think this will create a lot of blow back. one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
8 Agree
3/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation The use homeowners property as a means of creating the greenway network it becomes a non starter. additional pavement to existing roadways for bikes lanes and walkers would help. one month ago
8 Agree
Spines look good, arterial and neighborhood layouts need work. Leans too much towards arterial, will overbuild in areas that don't need it. Expect significant pushback when crossing private one month ago
8 Agree
Please prioritize increasing the lengths and connection of the "spine network" to facilitate commuting. The arterial and neighbor hood networks just add duplication, complexity, and waste resources one month ago
8 Agree
I support greenways, sidewalks, trails, walking paths. This all sounds great! I do NOT support any path, trail or greenway through private properties or through the middle of existing neighborhoods. one month ago
7 Agree
NO to the Happy Vally haw creek proposed projects. This is a very bad idea with our current drug,theft,crime and homeless problem in Asheville. Please do not bring this to our neighborhood. one month ago
7 Agree
We do need safer bike/walk trails thru AVL, I do NOT support them running thru neighborhoods. The HC design from Bullman Park to Masters Park is completely unacceptable. It creates a safety issue. one month ago
7 Agree
NO NO NO to the Arterial Greenway! You cannot put a pedestrian highway through private backyards in an established neighborhood. This would pass 10 feet from my kitchen window. Not going to happen! one month ago
7 Agree
As a property owner directly affected, I strongly oppose cutting directly through small private yards. Who would want this 10 ft from their kitchen window? Follow roads, creek beds, & railways only. one month ago
7 Agree
The Asheville City Council has failed the law-abiding citizens. Asheville caters to the drug using community without any regard to the safety of neighborhoods. Greenways would only be good if safe. one month ago
7 Agree
Why do you have to go through established neighborhoods and in between houses? Follow the creek beds and existing roads. The Happy Valley route will be met with tremendous resistance. one month ago
6 Agree
The Bullman Masters park greenway does not make any sense at all and is a terrible idea. one month ago
6 Agree
Due to the number of "campers", vagrants, trespassers, and illegal activities that they inflict which will not be addressed by the police, I cannot support greenways that encroach into neighborhoods. one month ago
6 Agree
Bike lanes will create more congestion and accudents. Walkways will attract vagrant tents and litter like in River Arts District, especially where Beloved has a pantry. one month ago
6 Agree
If this were implemented 10 years ago, that would have been all fine and good. However, crime is so rampant in the Asheville area that I would NOT feel comfortable using this network at all. one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
5 Agree
4/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Stay out of peoples' properties. Even if you receive an easement from a property owner, what about the neighboring homeowner or property owner? You are affecting s/he/they. one month ago
5 Agree
In a perfect world, it would be great. In the actual real world, where law enforcement is not a priority, this creates an unsafe network running through peoples' yards. one month ago
5 Agree
The Haw Creek map needs significant work. Cutting directly through Happy Valley is not a viable option. one month ago
5 Agree
Allowing 200 characters means you are not serious about obtaining opposing feedback. It is 20 characters longer than a twitter post and from this you think you are hearing from the public. one month ago
5 Agree
Should not allow access to private property. We shouldn’t be spending money on stuff like this until we fix other more pressing issues. one month ago
5 Agree
This is a bad idea. You may not realize it, but you are opening up more places for homeless camps. Please stop this. NOW! one month ago
5 Agree
I am in support of the arterial network except for the piece that connects the Charlie Bullman park through Happy Valley to above Maple Drive. That seems like extra foot traffic in our neighborhood. one month ago
5 Agree
All this time and money spent on planning that should be focused on moving our homeless camps out of our community not into them. Where are your priorities people? one month ago
5 Agree
Moving unhoused people away from resources is definitely not my priority. I support thinking up creative ways to address homelessness and 100% support Close The Gap. one month ago
1 Agree
side walk along new haw creek rd = good trail thru private property (bullman masters)= bad one month ago
5 Agree
I am against the Beaucatcher neighborhood greenway due to the amount of trees that need to be removed the destruction of the mountain to make it ADA compliant including concrete retaining walls. one month ago
5 Agree
Poor explanation of what you are trying to accomplish. I totally disagree with making Merrimon 3 lanes of traffic. It needs to be widened where possible. Bikers should us other streets. Merrimon is a one month ago
5 Agree
NCDOT proposed widening Merrimon back in 2018, but the neighbors fought against. It. You should thank them for not having a left turn lane the length of Merrimon. one month ago
Is this why you are proposing a Road Diet on Merrimon Ave? Which is totally absurd to go backwards. Same as Merrimon, Asheville needs to go underground with all of our Tele poles & utilities first. one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
5 Agree
5/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation With crime out of control in Asheville, I don’t support increased connectivity until there is an increase in investment in public safety. one month ago
4 Agree
In principle, this is a great idea. I am a resident of Haw Creek, and the proposed greenway in our neighborhood needs a route change. No way this should cut right through Happy Valley/private property one month ago
4 Agree
The videos maps are not clear about where the greenways will be built. Granular information means transparency. What these maps are is opaque and suggests community interest does not matter. one month ago
4 Agree
Love the idea. However, the proposed path has some greenways going through private property and very close to private homes in my area of Haw Creek. hope this is just the GIS overlay and not accurate. one month ago
4 Agree
They made it obscure intentionally. They could have used text to make clear where it was going but chose not to. And why do people who are outsiders get to decide on what happens in Happy Valley? one month ago
3 Agree
While this is nice, and obstructions need to be removed from sidewalks, a comprehensive plan with more public transportation would be nice. one month ago
4 Agree
I would love more protected bike lanes, I would definitely run errands and make quick visits for food if there were more protected greenways one month ago
4 Agree
Expansion of our greenway network is responsible and desperately needed. The improvements will be well worth the cost and I fully support any and all greenway development. one month ago
4 Agree
Please be more transparent. one month ago
4 Agree
Money well spent. Greenways improve the ability to bike and walk for recreation or to work and make the city more livable. one month ago
4 Agree
I fully support a functional and recreational greenway network. This would not only improve commutes and transportation but also recreational and tourist opportunities. one month ago
4 Agree
Need this done asap one month ago 4 Agree
The City of Asheville has more important things to spend the money on. The roads in this town are really bad. Also the homeless problem is out of control. This greenway system will become a campway. one month ago
3 Agree
stay out of Happy Valley!!! one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
3 Agree
6/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation also need priority on paving existing streets and walks and curbs and then do more greenways one month ago
3 Agree
I am in support of greenways along public access. I do NOT support greenways through private property! I do not want a greenway through the Happy Valley neighborhood. Existing streets are accessible one month ago
3 Agree
I am supportive of greenways as long as they do not include the use of private property. one month ago
3 Agree
I live on Parkview Drive and feel VERY STRONGLY about not having this greenway go through my backyard. We can safely walk down any of the streets in our neighborhood to access the proposed sidewalks. one month ago
3 Agree
Why do outsiders get to make decisions about what happens in Happy Valley. Why do they get to participate in decisions that affect our property values. one month ago
3 Agree
Not in Happy Valley or up the mountain from Happy Valley. one month ago
3 Agree
I would like to see the City of Asheville make Progress on the Growing Homeless issue(s) first...before undertaking these well meaning initiatives. one month ago
3 Agree
The Neighborhood Greenway Network for Haw Creek does not include the proposed greenway between Arco Rd and Beverly Rd along the creek. This proposal was submitted nearly two years ago. one month ago
3 Agree
The number 1 unaddressed need of our community for over 20 plus years..... one month ago
It seems like the connectivity of the proposed greenway is low. I would like to see more continues protected paths where you do not share the paths with the autos. It seems from the map many gaps. one month ago
3 Agree
I support this work. And look forward to how the new New Neighborhood Greenways work in practice. I am a little nervous about safety. one month ago
3 Agree
I am commenting specifically about the proposed path along Lakeshore Rd since that is my neighborhood. Desperately need a safe walking path from I26 to Merrimon on Lakeshore. one month ago
3 Agree
REPAIR THE ROADS FIRST! STOP WASTING MONEY ON LEFTIST BULLSCHIFF! one month ago
3 Agree
walking and biking make you leftist? and wHo aRe YoU yeLLiNg aT? one month ago
1 Agree
If completed, this would dramatically increase the livability of Asheville one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
3 Agree
7/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Numerous and far reaching, connected greenways of all kinds are valuable and supported one month ago
3 Agree
Our roads should not be used as playgrounds for children or for recreational bicycling. one month ago
3 Agree
I fully support this and hope it acutally happens. As an Asheville native I'm utterly disgusted and embarrassed at our city's initiatives for true pedestrian infrastructure. DO BETTER ASHEVILE one month ago
3 Agree
They don't really connect to each other. This is like the sidewalks that just stop and leave you hanging one month ago
3 Agree
It would be nice to have some water fountains and also the possibility for safety stations like on college campuses. one month ago
3 Agree
I would like to see an expansion down Mills Gap Rd of the smaller routes. Mills Gap is a super busy road and the neighborhoods and community would greatly benefit from an expansion that includes much one month ago
3 Agree
Developing all the planned geenways will be great one month ago
3 Agree
Neighborhood greenways would be terrific especially in Haw Creek where sidewalks are absent. Bike lanes are not well maintained in the COA. They collect road debris and make the bike lanes unsafe. one month ago
3 Agree
2017 Haw Creekside was promised sidewalks. Had multiple community meetings, Mayor said project was next. Funding secured! Then county came & put up guardrails. No communication after. Major fail COA! one month ago
1 Agree
I feel this priorities tourism instead of the many crisis facing our community. Homelessness and local being priced out. one month ago
3 Agree
The extensive greenway networks within residential neighborhoods, as opposed to the primary tourist areas around downtown, indicate that these are amenities for residents. one month ago
1 Agree
Leave the roads alone, the bike lanes are to dangerous. one month ago
3 Agree
The greenways that are proposed to go through people's yards (for instance, the Haw Creek connector to Master's Park seems to have a lot!) are a problem. Otherwise, I strongly support this project. one month ago
2 Agree
Greenways through wooded areas are basically just access points for new homeless camps. Show us you can manage our existing problems, before adding fuel to the fire. one month ago
2 Agree
Fix what we have first. one month ago 2 Agree
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
8/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation no one month ago 2 Agree
The City should first spend the time and funds to repair dangerous sidewalks, fill in gap areas of the sidewalks and make them safe and ADA compliant. WEhavesidewalk sections that have lifted, droppe one month ago
2 Agree
Greenways do not need to run through subdivisions. Traffic (speed/number of vehicles) is usually not an issue. People can walk and bike on existing roads in subdivisions. one month ago
2 Agree
it's based in stealing private property and has permanently changed and damaged the community unity and feel. Pits "them" against homeowners. A waste of time and resources. one month ago
2 Agree
I like the connection from the Hominy Creek Greenway into West Asheville Park. A lot of bang for the bucks! The Smith Mill Creek Greenway will be amazing if I-26 is ever reconfigured. one month ago
2 Agree
I would like to see the bike lanes on Riverside Drive extended all the way to Broadway. Right now they stop 3/10 of a mile south of that intersection, forcing bicycles out in to traffic. one month ago
2 Agree
NO GREENWAY IN HAPPY VALLEY IN HAW CREEK. TOO DISRUPTIVE. THE PARKWAY AND MTS TRAILK CAN BE REACHED IN MANY PLACES INCLUDING MASTERS PARK. NO LANF]D OWNER COMPENSATION IS A NON-STARTE one month ago
2 Agree
Do not support greenways coming through Happy Valley Neighborhoods in Haw Creek. Does not comply Greenway plan to link significant destinations. The BR PKY can be reached via Masters Park. one month ago
2 Agree
I do not support the Arterial plan for the Bullman Master Park Greenway. This needs a serious revision. The current plan shows disregard for the privacy of the existing neighborhoods and homes. one month ago
2 Agree
If people camp out on someone's private property, will police remove them? No. one month ago
2 Agree
Greenways are great for exercise but I don’t see them as a way to get from one place to another. And I’d still have to walk a long way or drive to greenways. one month ago
2 Agree
twitter is 280 characters. You gave us 200. You are not serious about getting opposing opinions. one month ago
2 Agree
If you can send individual tax bills to residents, you can send neighborhood-specific voting by mail (maybe this is a time for email) so that those affected can decide whether they want it. one month ago
2 Agree
Citywide voting means people in areas that are unaffected can make decisions with no "skin in the game" that affect others. That is wrong. one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
2 Agree
9/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation I know the Haw Creek project is not a priority. It is a major concern for me and I would oppose it until there was clarity about the actual properties being sought out so that I could gage its impact. one month ago
2 Agree
Love it. Are you aware of how many pedestrians are walking upon Old Haywood? SOOO MANY. The new apartments and houses brought people! LET THEM WALK!!!! LET THEM BIKE!!!! one month ago
2 Agree
I do not support the greenway. one month ago
2 Agree
don’t support neighborhood bc of ppl don’t pay attention to cars and expect right of way while not abiding by traffic signs-lights. not safe, slows already slow, congested traffic one month ago
2 Agree
There needs to be a sidewalk on Stoner, connecting Fairview Road and Thompson. one month ago
2 Agree
THERE NEEDS TO BE A SIDEWALK ON STONER CONNECTING FAIRVIEW RD. AND THOMPSON. one month ago
2 Agree
There NEEDS TO BE A SIDEWALK, FOR PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, ON STONER CONNECTING FAIRVIEW RD. AND THOMPSON. one month ago
2 Agree
It would be incredible to see some paths that run along the backyard property lines - hop on your bike or put on your walking/running shoes and go straight to trails! one month ago
2 Agree
In home owners back yard and neighborhoods? No way! one month ago
8 Agree
I 100% disagree! We did not purchase our properties with any intentions of their being public trails adjacent to our properties! one month ago
6 Agree
This concept obviously doesn't affect your privacy & safety. Take a good look around, greenways are homeless campgrounds. You going come kick them out of my yard and clean up the needles & trash? one month ago
4 Agree
Greenways must be safe to all parties: pedestrians, bikers, car drivers. Not safe when built on the roads used by all modules. one month ago
2 Agree
I would love and use a pedestrian ( and bike friendly) network. one month ago
2 Agree
I would love to see a greenway in the Haw Creek community that I could walk to from my house. one month ago
2 Agree
Impossible to rate three components without seeing entire network. Hard to judge connectivity without existing greenways shown. Need to add link from W. Asheville Greenway south to FBR. one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
2 Agree
10/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation I am very excited to see this greenway network - let's build it! one month ago
2 Agree
Please develop these as quickly as humanly possible. Thanks one month ago
2 Agree
This can’t happen soon enough. I just wonder if I’ll live to see it and enjoy all of it one month ago
2 Agree
West Asheville and Beaverdam seem left out of major projects one month ago
2 Agree
As a resident of South Asheville, I heartily support the Hendersonville Road sidepath! one month ago
2 Agree
Make more bike lanes, sidewalks, greenways, narrow existing roads to include bike lanes. Make roads one way if necessary to include bike lanes. Maintain and clean the bike lanes... on regular basis. one month ago
2 Agree
Greenways are great! I live by one and use it regularly. BUT . . if we're talking about efforts to get people to walk to amenities, we need sidewalks, and of course density & mixed use. one month ago
2 Agree
The extensive planning in place with these greenways is opening necessary doors to help mitigate the amount of vehicle traffic on the road as the population of AVL increases. one month ago
2 Agree
Please make improvements to the Reynolds BC path (bicycle corridor?). No area of buncombe is so hindered by the design of road infrastructure. It feels illegal to walk or bike into the city limits. one month ago
2 Agree
Wow. Thank you for all the work you've done. It was eye-opening to see all the data and modes you've assimilated into these proposals. one month ago
2 Agree
There should be a Greenway along US70 from Black Mountain to Azalea Rd. The current Greenway alignment along the Sw river is not helpful transportation-wise and has private prop conflicts. one month ago
2 Agree
We need this in Asheville., especially south Asheville. one month ago
2 Agree
I would like to see more bike and pedestrian connections. That might mean using eminent domain! It will be worth it! I am all for the long term public and environmental good. one month ago
1 Agree
Please extend Smokey Parkway to Rt 151, 'downtown Candler" so people can bike, transition easily to bus routes. one month ago
1 Agree
I hope that you extend past hominy and more into 'downtown' Candler area. More feasible to go from Pisgah Hwy to downtown Asheville. In general, I support 100% to make it more friendly to bikes. one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
1 Agree
11/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Greenways should be developed before communities are built. Building them after the fact only creates new problems and violates personal property rights. You need to manage the homeless problem first one month ago
1 Agree
Creating a Greenway through the middle of a neighborhood does not seem like a reasonable idea given the level of access it gives to those individual's property. one month ago
1 Agree
Very ambitious and worth while project. I hope you focus on the French Broad and Swannanoa rivers first, since these will be the most popular. one month ago
1 Agree
I Fully support resources being used to improve walking and biking around the Asheville area. one month ago
1 Agree
Our traffic is so crowded now if you close lanes for bikes it adds to the congestion. If this goes through then all bicycles should have to have insurance and pays for a special tag! one month ago
1 Agree
The actual evidence on actual road diets supports the opposite conclusion. After the road diet: Pedestrian safety skyrockets; More people walk from home; Cars get from one point to the other FASTER one month ago
This is a waste of time and money. We need to think about the criminal panhandlers that will fill this space rendering it USELESS to law abiding locals. one month ago
1 Agree
As typical of Asheville, let's address the things we HAVE to have before jumping on the nice to have. Crime, homelessness, lack of transparency, police, all issues to be addressed and paid for. one month ago
1 Agree
Would like to see more funding to improve the streets that are tearing up my car. I'm handicapped and would like to be able to drive without enduring more pain. one month ago
1 Agree
If we want to encourage people to walk more frequently to their destination, then build sidewalks on all of the many roads that are currently lacking. one month ago
1 Agree
I will not, the number of CHARACTERS ALLOWED ARE INSUFFICIENT IN EACH OF THESE SECTIONS IS INSUFFICIENT. one month ago
1 Agree
great project, but we don't have essential sidewalks in Haw Creek. one month ago
1 Agree
Really glad that AVL is moving ahead with greenway links, to create a smaller footprint. one month ago
1 Agree
Several comments note difficulty seeing connectivities in the plan. I was finally able to do it by spending a lot of time zooming and scrolling the last map. So - plan looks good but is hard to see. one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
1 Agree
12/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation I strongly support this integrated and connected plan, and would use the network extensively both on foot and bike. Am glad to see a focus on connecting existing sections and shovel-ready projects. one month ago
1 Agree
I support the spine and arterial plans. I am concerned how the neighborhood plan would work with smaller streets and parking needs. one month ago
1 Agree
I am for this great project. It will continue to make the day to day lives of citizens enjoyable in our beautiful city. And, who knows, some tourists may enjoy it too. Like a small European city. one month ago
1 Agree
Awesome informative survey! Many people are now wanting e-bikes to reduce “car traffic”. There’s an upsurge in walking to improve overall well-being! Very ‘forward thinking’. Thank you! one month ago
1 Agree
I support improvement of all bicycle and pedestrian pathways. It is one way I try to keep my cost of living down but right now I do not feel safe commuting by bicycle. one month ago
1 Agree
The more greenways, the better! one month ago
1 Agree
Strongly support access and a more interconnected/less insular feel to Asheville in general. Presenting paths that don't seem to run right through houses might help with knee jerk NIMBY opposition. one month ago
1 Agree
The proposed network looks great. These greenways will help reduce traffic and provide a way for people of all abilities and incomes to get around the city. one month ago
1 Agree
The greenways will be an important way to get to work. They need to be lit so that they are safe in the early mornings and at night. one month ago
1 Agree
The system's projected improvements are exceptionally good. one month ago
1 Agree
Why can people vote on a total program and not on the specifics that affect their neighborhoods. As someone wrote why does WAVL get to decide on N AVL? one month ago
1 Agree
Because county, city and state agencies are of satan. They are not Godly intities. Therefore, what we think is unimportant to them. one month ago
I do not support these projects until specifics can be provided as to streets that these projects will run on since the various maps are unclear one month ago
1 Agree
I am car-free and fully support turning Asheville into a pedestrian-and bicycle-friendly city! one month ago
1 Agree
Some of the areas (i.e. Hazel Mill Rd), is already congested and adding sidewalks or bike paths will take peoples land away from them and just cause more issues. one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
1 Agree
13/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Greenways in Asheville are considered transportation pathways. Most of the existing and proposed greenways do not help cyclist or pedestrians easily and safely access business or cultural centers one month ago
1 Agree
Haw Creek houses a lot of people with new building starting to take over. Why is there not more happening in this area? one month ago
1 Agree
Watching the video. I stopped each time a list was put on the screen to read what was there. It was unreadable to a viewer. one month ago
1 Agree
This entire system will be amazing for locals and tourists alike. Great economic impact and investment. one month ago
1 Agree
Would like to see additional greenway along Waters Road in the Haw Creek comunity or create a loop inside the community somehow. Everything there is just about dead end with no sidewalks and dangerous one month ago
1 Agree
I love all of it but I would like to see Leicester Highway and old County home Road included. one month ago
1 Agree
This is a great recreation plan. They are not going to help poorer residents get to work/grocery stores. I would like to see recreation dollars put into parks and playgrounds, which are sorely lacking one month ago
1 Agree
Need to add to Neighborhood Greenways the pathway from S. Charlotte St to MLK Blvd that runs between White Labs and St. Matthias. It is heavily used but too narrow and covered with kudzu. one month ago
1 Agree
I'm very happy to see that the Beaucatcher Mountain Greenway is still on the table. We here in East End/Valley Street have been waiting a long time for the project to get started. one month ago
1 Agree
N. A-ville off of Beaverdam Road is not walking-friendly. I have to drive to greenways to get a good walk. I travel to RAD 4x per week. Hope you provide parking at some of the proposed connections. one month ago
1 Agree
In north Asheville, off Beaverdam Road, I'd have to drive to any of the greenway areas. Hope there's parking provided at some end points. I current drive to RAD to walk along the river about 4 times one month ago
1 Agree
Love this! Especially the plans from French Broad River Park to the WNC Nature Center and beyond. Would love to see something through Fairview. one month ago
1 Agree
Use more city right of ways to connect the Oakley neighborhood and make it more walkable without having to walk on Fairview Ave one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
1 Agree
14/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation I support as many miles of greenway and bike lanes as possible. I think having more of this would reduce our vehicle traffic congestion. Alternate modes of travel is one of the things that I love here one month ago
1 Agree
Bikes on the roads are nightmare. These bike people will have 20 cars behind them trying desperately to get around them and get to work or appointments. They never pull over to let any one by. one month ago
3 Agree
I would like to see an expansion on MIlls Gap Rd. Please consider adding the smaller routes to Mills Gap Rd. one month ago
1 Agree
This will dramatically improve the quality of life in Asheville! 29 days ago
I support all improvements to make the city more accessible. one month ago
Asheville roads are narrow and winding. The more you can separate car from bike traffic the better. Traffic calming features like speed bumps are important for bike and pedestrian safety also. one month ago
AVL roads are narrow and winding- The more you can separate car traffic from bike traffic the better. Traffic calming measures like speed bumps are also very important one month ago
Asheville roads are winding and narrow the more you can separate car traffic from bike traffic the better traffic calming measures like speed bumps are also great one month ago
I am in support as long as it does not require access to private property without the right of refusal. one month ago
Bring able to cycle or walk off the road, paved or unpaved, to more schools, businesses, communities of worship, etc and area communities is a win for pedestrians, cyclists, the city and region. one month ago
The NH greenways pretty much exist and are usable as-is. Sure it's cheap and shows something, but I feel teh money is better spent on the otherr two projects one month ago
As pertains to Happy Valley, on the one hand, the maps don't show greenways cutting through yet the video discusses it. Until there is clarity, I cannot support anything in HV one month ago
I support the expansion of greenways, but in no way am I in favor a paths going thru, or encouraged to use private property. one month ago
I support biking one month ago
Let the city put sidewalks where promised and when developers put apartments and town homes improve the roadways and bike paths then in lieu of no room to change the roads after construction one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
15/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation This sounds like an awesome homeless camping network thru folks' yards and neighborhoods. Since COA has abandoned any pretense of protecting the citizens this is excellent liberal logic. one month ago
For Rhododendron-Falconhurst Connector to work, sidewalks are needed on some roads (Lanvale/Vermont Ave). Crossing Sand Hill Rd at Lanvale will be dangerous. one month ago
Most neighborhood streets can’t support 2 cars. Don’t see the benefit of this huge investment. one month ago
Here’s a benefit: you won’t have to live the rest of your life knowing you needlessly killed a cyclist as you drove around a blind curve. one month ago
Excellent start, needs more county greenways to be connected too one month ago
I can see how in some area's it would be beneficial and others it would not be welcomed. Therefore since all the area's were lumped together it was hard to before it as a whole. one month ago
With Murdoch being part of the proposed Greenway plan, I do not see the need nor the reasoning for the road diet of Merrimon. It will push cars from Merrimon into proposed greenway sections. one month ago
Nothing to add one month ago
This is wonderful as long as it does not impact private property. Also, will this include fixing existing sidewalks? one month ago
Barnard Avenue is a narrow road. Why bring the greenway down it? What about going from Edgewood to the campus and connecting with the greenway on W T Weaver Blvd. through the campus? one month ago
I do not support greenways that require street "diets". I do not think reducing lanes will cause drivers to start walking or biking. Bikers have disproportionate influence and should not. one month ago
The actual evidence on actual road diets supports the opposite conclusion. After the road diet: Pedestrian safety skyrockets; More people walk from home; Cars get from one point to the other FASTER one month ago
How about we focus with the NCDOT on repair our pothole filled roads and crumbling shoulders before we worry about footpaths? Removing all the nasty broke down chain link fence around the city also. one month ago
If it will get bikes off the roads, I support it! They’re a ridiculous hazard on winding mountain roads and there is no common sense reason to accommodate them as roadways are currently configured. one month ago
Exactly. And this is remedied by Building roads that are designed intelligently to accommodate ALL types of traffic one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
16/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation We desperately need the Rhododendron Falconhurst connector! That last stretch on Vermont heading to the park is terrifying for pedestrians. We have many younger families there + neighborhood walkers. one month ago
The congestion people experience can be enormously reduced by making park n rides and having aerial trams take people, not cars, tow and from downtown. Saves our skyway, and workers can get dw fast. one month ago
Greenway as proposed will create car traffic issues and dangerous bike traffic one month ago
I do not support. The proposal would cause too much interference with vehicle- crowed roads and cause dangerous situations for commuters. one month ago
We need more bike lanes! More options to commute and better living! one month ago
I am definitely not in support of bikers and hikers traveling along my property line!!! one month ago
I do not agree with greenways going through people's yards or private property. In my opinion it is not safe for pedestrian and cyclists to share the same sidewalk. one month ago
Don’t worry. It won’t be your property anymore after the state takes it away from you by eminent domain. one month ago
I support any additions to improve bike and pedestrian access, as well as less reliance on cars. one month ago
Would you feel the same way if it cut through your property? That's what the request for easements refers to. Unpaid for easements. I wouldn't want that in my neighborhood. one month ago
Shame on you Asheville and everyone who agrees with you. To blaintantly displace folk who are already w/o four walls and spend $ for walk paths & bike trails. Proves you're greedy & uncaring! one month ago
DISPLACING THOSE WHO ARE ALREADY W/O A PHYSICAL DWELLING. THEN SPENDING $ FOR PATHS TO WALK ON, YOU ALL HAVE NO SHAME. one month ago
It is hard to tell from maps but I really hope Asheville can have a nice healthy Greenway where people can bike and walk safely not next to cars all the time. one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
17/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Wow! You are not entitled run greenways through private residential properties. Widen roads for bike lanes. Fix existing sidewalks and add sidewalks where you have promised you would. one month ago
You must be speaking with the privilege of not having it affect your actual property. Those of us who are at risk are entitled to protect ourselves and our investments from confiscation/encroachment one month ago
It is the exactly same process by which roads are built…but you have no problems with that? The right to own private property is secondary to a public need such as transportation. one month ago
yes yes yes one month ago
Why is A6, the Biltmore-McDowell Corridor, an Artery instead of Spine? Directly connecting such major areas as Downtown and Biltmore would seem to warrant being an artery. one month ago
PLEASE PRIORITIZE EAST! Most of the east greenway sections city property and would help broaden the connectivity of Asheville. Please let us know how we encourage the DOT to work in conjunct w/ city! one month ago
It is great as long as others do not suffer to make it one month ago
People are suffering without these safe pedestrian corridors. Traffic injuries and fatalities affect both the victim and the driver. All die-hard non pedestrians (is this you Really?) should be all in one month ago
There is a lot of foot and bike traffic connecting from RAD to Haywood Rd (into EWAVL and WAVL) much of this traffic comes up Waynesville which has no painted lines or signs to indicate multiuse. one month ago
A paved pump track would also be nice with access from the greenway. one month ago
HELL NO! one month ago
This is an attempt by the city to dump drug addict encampments into residential areas. There will be drug needles and human feces just like downtown. The city did not notify Happy Valley of this plan. one month ago
I would like to see more consideration of the Enka/Candler area as that would also show the blooming life happening that way. one month ago
STEP 2. On a scale of 1 - 10, how much do you support upgrading these NCDOT roads in the map above for accessibility to remove obstacles for individuals with mobility limitations? Average
1 (do not support)
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
10 (it's fantastic)
18/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
STEP 2. On a scale of 1 - 10, how much do you support upgrading these City of Asheville roads in the map above for accessibility to remove obstacles for individuals with mobility limitations? Average
1 (do not support)
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
10 (it's fantastic)
19/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Use this space if you would like to make a comment on the ADA network. Ada improvements help everyone. People with strollers, children, older adults. Its good for the whole community! one month ago
21 Agree
As the population ages, we need more accessibility to safe walking, especially for exercise & wellness. one month ago
18 Agree
Strongly support the proposed Merrimon road diet. one month ago
15 Agree
Also strongly support the proposed Merrimon road diet one month ago
6 Agree
ADA improvements help everyone and are very fundable projects. Universal design! one month ago
4 Agree
Merrimon is imposable for wheelchair bound people to navigate. There are utility poles in the middle of the sidewalk, driveways that don't meet ADA, sidewalks that are to narrow or are missing. one month ago
2 Agree
We need sidewalks in Haw Creek! one month ago
2 Agree
strongly object to merrimon ave “diet” one month ago
2 Agree
I am in support of merrimon road diet and any other improvements to all for pedestrian mobility in protected sidewalks, bike lanes that all movement for disabled as well as non disabled. one month ago
2 Agree
Strongly support the Merrimon Ave road diet. one month ago
2 Agree
I didn't see anything about removing power lines from the middle of sidewalks - one of the most infuriating aspects of sidewalks in this city. one month ago
2 Agree
We need more crosswalks (with walk signals) and better sidewalks for everyone and this is a great start. one month ago
2 Agree
Improvement of key connectors for accessibility is critical for strollers and kids. one month ago
2 Agree
The ADA network is more important than the GreenWay. one month ago
1 Agree
I am disabled and many of the sidewalks have utility poles right in the middle of them. UNDERGROUND ALL ULITY LINED one month ago
1 Agree
ADA improvements are required for our growing population of seniors one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
1 Agree
20/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Merrimon Ave. Road Diet will cause major traffic and safety problems. one month ago
1 Agree
Major gap on Mount Clare, from Spears Ave south to sidewalk on east side. Lexington east side from Woodfin to College needs repair. Many more important sidewalk/ADA improvements missing one month ago
1 Agree
Pedestrianization is essential to $u$tainable city growth. Mix-use buildings, urban density, public transit, and infrastructure that prioritizes biomobility. Read "Happy City" by C. Montgomery. one month ago
1 Agree
Haw Creek was promised sidewalks over three years ago. The money was set aside for the project & was "on the list". Instead, county put in railings. Nice communication folks! Where did that money go? one month ago
1 Agree
There should be sidewalks on all major roads on both side of the street with appropriate accessibility. one month ago
1 Agree
Yes, improve and increase quality sidewalks. Remove obstacles. More crosswalk signals. The Merrimon Ave plan needs work. Widen! To much traffic to whittle down into two moving lanes. one month ago
1 Agree
NO "CLOSE THE GAP" IN HAW CREEK, HAPPY VALLEY!!! OR ANYWHERE IN OUR HAW CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD! one month ago
1 Agree
I support upgrades to roads. It makes sense to have sidewalks along bus routes. one month ago
1 Agree
Merrimon N. of Weaver should be higher priority: two missing segments, poor condition, high traffic volume, new Urban Place zoning one month ago
1 Agree
Please consider the ADA access to transit connections rather than having isolated bus stops with no way to get to the bus stop with sidewalks. one month ago
1 Agree
Merrimon sidewalks and curbs are in poor condition and may not have garnered as much feedback though GAP, even though they are in the spotlight with the 4-3 conversion possibility. They are important. one month ago
1 Agree
The lack of lighting, sidewalks, and crosswalks between 74A and Reynolds High School is seriously concerning. Students walk there every day. I'm surprised there hasn't been an accident. one month ago
1 Agree
On the Murdock Avenue section it is important to align with the Weaver Park Greenway which crosses from Murdock over to the tennis course and a very scary sidewalk to the crosswalk to to Merrimon one month ago
1 Agree
Murdock Avenue section it is important to align with the Weaver Park Greenway which crosses over to the tennis course and a very scary sidewalk to the crosswalk to to Merrimon. Also the Merrimon one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
1 Agree
21/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Merriman road diet is crazy idea. Great for pedestrians strolling around. But if you are trying to get from A to B, it is nuts. one month ago
1 Agree
Not being disabled, can’t imagine actual difficulty in accessibility. Even so, I’d rather COA put $$ towards greenway plans than this proposed ADA network. NCDOT ADA work is sufficient. one month ago
1 Agree
I support ADA BIking one month ago
We need to improve Asheville for ALL. one month ago
Nothing to add one month ago
I really don't understand this presentation and can't give an opinion. one month ago
disagree strongly with proposed Merrimon diet. Please consider that the vast majority of users are in cars and that will not change with a diet. Bikers should use less busy roads. one month ago
I sure wish you would see that "pedestrian crossing" was signed at the intersection of Trinity Chapel and New Haw Creek. There is a curb cut and ADA compliant sidewalk for the blind, but no markings one month ago
Aerial trams taking people from park n rides is needed in a city as mountainous as ours. This would create long lasting jobs, enable aging populations and service workers to get downtown safely/fast. one month ago
I strongly support any ADA improvements! one month ago
Another bait & switch ya'll. Don't fall for it. one month ago
Stop using those of us who are disabled to further your plans. This is no different than "low income housing". Then yall build hotels. JUST STOP THE BS one month ago
This part is extremely important and should be integrated with any mass transportation planning. All bus stops should be compliant. one month ago
More sidewalks! one month ago
I appreciate sidewalks for all of Asheville and better curbs and crosswalk one month ago
Do not even consider the ludicris merrimon ave proposal. Pls allow NAVL residents a larger say in how their area is about to suck one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
22/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Lmk one month ago
Recommendations of Biltmore-McDowell Corridor Study should be implemented ASAP. Then the Biltmore-Broadway and Lexington projects. Together will greatly improve core downtown-Biltmore travel options. one month ago
Oakley Community is in dire need of attention to safety for pedestrians! Thankful for the lengthy sidewalks but too close to busy road & hazardous for those strolling baby’s, dog walkers & joggers! one month ago
We need to expand this plan further into the neighborhoods and not just main thoroughfares. one month ago
Recently became disabled and really appreciate improvements to increase mobility. one month ago
Please consider adding a sidewalk to Courtland Street. It is a racetrack and extremely dangerous fro walking or biking. It is a miracle someone hasn't been seriously hurt this street is used heavily one month ago
I approve mostly, the problem is road diets in conjunction with sidewalk widening and future development. The possibility of increased traffic with narrow roads brings more congestion. one month ago
I think ADA improvements are a great idea but I feel like most of the downtown improvements will mainly benefit the very wealthy folks that can now afford to live near downtown. one month ago
We could use a pedestrian signal at the corner of Hazzard Street and MLK Dr. It is dangerous for the hearing impaired as one has to use one sense of hearing as well as sight to cross the road safely. one month ago
I don't see the point of some of these segments that don't connect to another segment. one month ago
Merrimon road diet is not the best idea. How are people who live in North Asheville supposed to get in and out of the area? Charlotte is already done and that was always an alternate route. one month ago
Fairview Ave needs major help. Glad to see it's included one month ago
Where is Haywood rd? one month ago
It looks fine. one month ago
ADA improvements go well beyond the disabled. This is a very appreciated consideration. Getting these changes in place set the city up for future improvements of the like. one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
23/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
STEP 2. On a scale of 1 - 10, how much do you support upgrading these NCDOT roads in the map above for pedestrian improvements? Average
1 (do not support)
10 (it's fantastic)
STEP 2. On a scale of 1 - 10, how much do you support upgrading these City of Asheville roads in the map above for pedestrian improvements? Average
1 (do not support)
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
10 (it's fantastic)
24/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
Use this space if you would like to make a comment on the pedestrian network. Adding additional sidewalks along New Haw Creek Rd from Bell Rd to Maple Dr. would connect Masters Park to the community and protect pedestrians on a dangerous and curvy part of New Haw Creek Rd. one month ago
15 Agree
No Close the Gap in Haw Creek! Not in my back yard, not in my neighborhood! one month ago
4 Agree
Access from West Asheville/Bear Creek to the Brevard Road Outlets area needs higher prioritization for connecting housing to jobs. one month ago
15 Agree
Any and all pedestrian improvements are good. one month ago
11 Agree
This format is so bad. The map is topography so really hard work out. one month ago
8 Agree
I strongly support a side walk in Haw Creek running from Beverly Road to Bell Road. one month ago
3 Agree
Not in my neighborhood! Not in Haw Creek! one month ago
1 Agree
Sidewalks for New Haw Creek are a good idea because they are on a bus route. The Greenway for New Haw Creek would confiscate private property and cut through people's yards; I don't support that . one month ago
3 Agree
why are there no improvements to the traffic light cycles? adding a 'walk only' "no turn on red" part of the cycle would do somuch for safety. Other places have this standard. one month ago
3 Agree
Why a Greenway AND sidewalk on New Haw Creek? The sidewalk is a great idea and much needed and should be a #1 priority. The path going through so many private yards is not practical or safe. one month ago
3 Agree
Sidewalks seems to duplicate a lot of the proposed greenway paths. Sidewalks make more sense in than the proposed arterial/neighborhood greenways, don't need both. Make sure you coordinate efforts one month ago
3 Agree
Please consider extending the sidewalks along New Haw Creek and adding sidewalks to Old Haw Creek. Residents of all ages walk in these areas despite their absence and consistently have to dodge cars. one month ago
3 Agree
Roads are made for cars. one month ago
I wish there was a plan for sidewalks up Asbury rd in Enka. People north of Smokey Park have cant access any greenways bring proposed just across the road, and cant walk to the grocery stores. one month ago
3 Agree
We need to feel safe walking on Merrimon all the way down to Chestnut. The sections closer to downtown should have priority as that’s where people live who actually do walk to destinations. one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
2 Agree
25/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation "Any and all pedestrian improvements are good." - Seconded. Make Asheville walkable and everything else will fall into place. Let's be the shining light of change everyone thinks we are! one month ago
2 Agree
Improving the pedestrian network for Asheville is common sense. We are far behind where we should be. Please increase funding for these types of projects which are much needed as the City grows. one month ago
2 Agree
Lakeshore Road desperately needs pedestrian path. I see walkers, joggers, and bikers nearly hit by cars each week. People in that neighborhood should be able to walk safely to stores along Merrimon. one month ago
2 Agree
N Bear Creek Rd, Emma Rd work needed. Need more sidewalks everywhere in this town. (Can we please bury power lines during all this construction, too?) one month ago
2 Agree
How about the west Asheville area of Candler we were promised sidewalks when we were taking into Asheville one month ago
1 Agree
Merrimon Ave needs wider sidewalks, better streetlights and the utilitie poles need to be removed. one month ago
1 Agree
There is no sidewalk or walking path at all along Riverside between RAD (past White Duck) and Broadway - seems this would be a well used to connect RAD and WAVL to Broadway etc.? one month ago
1 Agree
*a very dangerous section in the RAD along the sidewalk across from ‘Home Ground Coffee’. Those exiting the Carrier Park area onto the Amboy sidewalk have poor visibility for oncoming bikers/pedestria one month ago
In of Haw Creek, you're suggesting putting sidewalks on some people's front yards and redundant greenways in their backyards! These plans need to be revised. I do not support Close the GAP in HC. one month ago
1 Agree
Desperately need a sidewalk in Haw Creek, without power poles sticking up out of the middle of it! Moms with strollers, people running in low light, etc. one month ago
1 Agree
Frustrated with the City for how slow any progress on Bonds that were voted on and approved for sidewalks. Why even bother with asking us for a vote? one month ago
1 Agree
We need sidewalks in Haw Creek one month ago
1 Agree
Very excited for a safer Haw Creek neighborhood for our children. Currently New Haw Creek is incredibly dangerous to walk or bike. one month ago
1 Agree
We have voted a bond in 2016for Beverly to Bell RD sidewalk. The city needs to complete that project one month ago
1 Agree
Get a car and pay for your tag, stickers, license, etc. If you want to ride your bike. Cars have prority! one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
1 Agree
26/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Mostly good, being in the mountains there are some design challenges ahead, but overall needed. one month ago
1 Agree
Pedestrian improvements only help if grocery stores/jobs are very close to people. A better bus system would connect people to jobs and stores. Ask the Jamaican Grove Park workers how they get to work one month ago
1 Agree
Please don't forget about lighting when improving pedestrian areas. S. Charlotte Street has sidewalks but very little lighting. one month ago
1 Agree
At present, there are sidewalks on 10% of New Haw Creek Rd and 1% of Old Haw Creek Rd, the two main roads serving the Haw Creek valley. Safety requires we do better. one month ago
1 Agree
I hope Council adopts this plan and prioritizes funding and implementation. one month ago
1 Agree
No way! one month ago
Need to address the lack of lighting, sidewalks, and crosswalks on Rocket Drive going into the A. C. Reynolds campus. one month ago
1 Agree
Please prioritize actual greenway construction over making existing streets pedestrian friendly. All streets can use improvements to pedestrian safety but don’t use them as a cop out. one month ago
1 Agree
Oh so needed. Difficult to walk almost everywhere one month ago
1 Agree
Get a car. one month ago
The Merrimon Avenue section from downtown I240 to Weaver says "road diet" I strongly support. I also support wider sidewalks and tree plantings to slow down traffic and make walking and crossing safe one month ago
1 Agree
I support a comprehensive and safe pedestrian infrastructure in our great city. It's a shame seeing so many roads without sidewalks or terribly dangerous pedestrian conditions. one month ago
1 Agree
The road diet plan for Merrimon is a must. Currently, Merrimon is awful for EVERYONE, including drivers in cars. Make it a neighborhood road so people can actually walk and bike to businesses there. one month ago
1 Agree
It is shameful that quality sidewalks are not mandatory on all city streets. Absolutely shameful. one month ago
1 Agree
I support all pedestrian sidewalk efforts! But we need places to go, and that means density & mixed uses. Asheville could be a "15 minute city" but it requires a holistic approach w/housing & transit. one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
1 Agree
27/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Again (NCDOT) please make pedestrian/bike access between the city and Reynolds community possible. It currently is quite literally a death trap crossing the 40/240 interchange onto Fairview rd from 74 one month ago
1 Agree
But a car. one month ago
Please please please add sidewalks further down Mills Gap Rd. The neighborhoods and community would greatly benefit from sidewalks extending down Mills Gap Rd one month ago
1 Agree
Asheville sidewalks are narrow and broken and not connected. I walk every day to drop off and pick up my kid from school and it is a treacherous journey every time. one month ago
I support pedestrians one month ago
We need sidewalks and traffic calming on the section of Vermont Ave leading to West Asheville park. one month ago
I want a walkable city! Please help us get there. I am so tired of being car dependent in Asheville. Beaverdam Rd. needs a bike lane and a sidewalk! one month ago
So badly needs to be done! RT 191 is so dangerous and would love to see it expanded to Bent Creek AND to Sand Hill . Fairview Rd to WNC nature/mall area important. Walking from Candler parks/rec. one month ago
Use the proposed greenway section on Murdoch instead of transforming Merrimon into a 2 lane with turning. Too many buses, too many l/r turns. It will cause more traffic in heavy residential areas. one month ago
Nta one month ago
I love the plan to make Merrimon much more pedestrian friendly. one month ago
New Haw Creek Rd at Trinity Chapel desperately needs signage to indicate there is a pedestrian crossing there. It is very dangerous!!! one month ago
Please, we need sidewalks (at a minimum) on Vermont Ave from Olney to West Asheville Park! Many young families live there, and cut-through vehicle traffic is dangerously fast. one month ago
Put aerial trams that take people to and from downtown in. Sidewalks are great but the hills are rough on everyone. Money spent to sidewalks doesn't solve the problem for less fit folks,. Park n ride one month ago
Vermont Ave from Olney to the Park needs a sidewalk. one month ago
Vermont Avenue between Olney and Davenport needs a sidewalk to connect existing sidewalk (Haywood Road to Olney) with the park. one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
28/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation Stop the madness of baiting & switching. We're not as ignorant as you'd like to think. one month ago
Please consider a 25 mph city wide default speed limit unless otherwise posted. one month ago
It is difficult to tell where the need is highest, since pedestrian issues can be very local. Please consider a 25 mpg citywide default speed limit, with only the larger roads having 35 mph limits. one month ago
I support sidewalks! one month ago
Strongly support a sidewalk on Johnston Blvd one month ago
Need more wheel chair accessability one month ago
Vermont Avenue needs sidewalk from Haywood Rd all the way to Davenport Rd and the West Asheville Park. Active neighbors with children currently walk in the street among speeding cut-thru traffic. one month ago
How can the Haw Creek sidewalks be such a low priority when funding was already approved for it? one month ago
It appears that Haw Creek sidewalks are a low priority. How can this be when funding was already allocated for it? one month ago
Improve neighborhoods, not downtown for tourists. I can't walk from my house to a proposed greenway. It's too dangerous one month ago
Old Haw Creek lacks basic sidewalks one month ago
Very much in favor of these improvements, though confused about some roads showing up in all 3 sections, e.g. Southside Ave. Does this mean 1 set of improvements could pursue multiple funding sources? one month ago
If the road diet is implemented for Merrimon then sidewalk upgrades need to be part of the plan like they were for Charlotte St. one month ago
All access is important, but I see the worst experiences of pedestrian to be east side. Please make something happen on Tunnel Rd. to Swannanoa River Rd. to the new proposed Greenways near Azalea! one month ago
No one month ago
Merrimon and much of Asheville needs more, consistant streetlights to feel safe at night. one month ago
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
29/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation I do support the addition of Sidewalks and those are sufficient to connect people to anywhere they want to go. No need to do the greenway project right through their backyards too! Please revisit. one month ago
Missing a mount gap in sidewalk on Mt. Claire and needed sidewalk repairs throughout the UDO encompassing one mile beyond downtown boundary. one month ago
More sidewalks from low income housing to bus stops is a must! one month ago
Please add a sidewalk along Courtland. It is a nightmare to try to walk it as it has become a racetrack! one month ago
Hard to evaluate without seeing where gaps are in existing sidewalk network. Add sidewalk on Osborne Road one month ago
Where is Haywood rd? one month ago
WE should keep improving it. one month ago
I support. one month ago
How willing would you be to pay a small increase in property taxes to fund pedestrian and greenway projects in the City? (Click and use the slider to indicate your willingness). As a way to fund pedestrian or greenway projects, many communities bring a property tax increase proposal to the voters for approval. The community decides what amount is needed (i.e. a "penny") and if approved, taxpayers would pay an additional penny, or one cent, on every dollar of property tax. Average
Not at all willing
Very willing
How much of an increase in property tax would you support to fund pedestrian and greenway projects? (Click and use the slider to indicate your willingness). Average
No pennies
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
Two pennies
30/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
What gender do you identify as? 48% Female 44% Male 7% Prefer not to say 1% Others
227 respondents
What is your age? 21% 56-65 20% 36-45 19% 66-75 17% 46-55 13% 26-35 6% Prefer not to answer 5% Over 75 0% Others
234 respondents
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
31/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
What is your race/ethnicity? Select all that apply. 78%
White
15%
Prefer not to say
181
35
4%
Black or African-American
9
3%
Other
6
1%
Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish
3
0%
Asian
1
0%
American Indian or Alaska Native
1
0%
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0
231 Respondents
I am an individual that has functional needs or disabilities affecting my ability to use the streets, sidewalks, greenways, or the transit system in Asheville. The things that affect me include: Select all that apply. 82%
Does not apply
12%
Walking
142
21
5%
Hearing
8
5%
Moving
8
3%
Vision
6
3%
Breathing
6
3%
Other
5
2%
Cognitive abilities
4
174 Respondents
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
32/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
In what area of Asheville (or the region) do you LIVE? By answering this question, it helps us make sure we are hearing from people across the City. We won't be able to identify your specific address. You can enter the nearest cross streets in the boxes below; or, using the map, drag the blue point to Asheville and then zoom in and drag it to the approximate location where you live and select 'Confirm Location.' Toggle Clustering
231
In what area of Asheville (or the region) do you WORK? By answering this question, it helps us make sure we are hearing from people across the City. We won't be able to identify your specific address. You can enter the nearest cross streets in the boxes below; or, using the map, drag the blue point to Asheville and then zoom in and drag it to the approximate location where you live and select 'Confirm Location.' Toggle Clustering
221
2
2
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
33/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
If you would like to receive project updates, please provide your email address. bradleybnew@gmail.com 29 days ago
rdame58@gmail.com one month ago
jeffaltman@gmail.com one month ago
Katefehlenberg@gmail.com one month ago
candiedginger@charter.net one month ago
On a scale of 1 - 10, how much do you support pedestrian improvements on these City of Asheville roads? This includes filling missing sidewalk sections, improving pedestrian crossings and frequency, and in some cases, providing more separation from traffic. Click on the image to enlarge and explore. Also see clickable map at the bottom of the page for more map exploration options. Average
1 (do not support)
10 (it's fantastic)
Unless the City or NCDOT owns the right-of-way (ROW), building sidewalks and side paths often requires a trade-off like purchasing ROW or redesigning existing lanes. What is your willingness for the following trade-offs? (Click and use the slider to indicate your willingness). Average
Not at all willing
Very willing
Changing a vehicle travel lane for use as a sidewalk or side path. Average
Not at all willing
Very willing
Public funds being used to purchase private property to build a sidewalk or greenway. Average
Not at all willing
Very willing
On a scale of 1 - 10, how much do you support the proposed ADA Network? Average
1 (do not support)
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
10 (it's fantastic)
34/35
4/20/22, 8:50 PM
City of Asheville, NC - Report Creation
How should new pedestrian facilities (sidewalks, crosswalks, greenways, etc.) be funded in the City? (Select all that apply) No data to display...
We have proposed a set of projects for you to consider and provide feedback. These project ideas are still conceptual and can be found in the following map. This map includes the streets and greenways that are prioritized for Citywide sidewalk repairs, ADA upgrades, completion of missing sidewalk or greenway segments. Instructions 1. Hover your mouse over the map to zoom into the project lines, and click on each to learn more. 2. Drag and drop pins onto project lines that you LOVE, LIKE, feel NEUTRAL about, or DISLIKE. 3. For each pin that you put on the map, you can select Post Now or Post with Comment to include a comment. 4. If you decide not to include a point, you can click 'X' on the comment box to cancel. 5. You can click on other people's points and respond accordingly. After you are complete, please click 'Continue' to move to the next page of the survey. No data to display...
To learn more about all of these projects, hover your mouse over the following interactive map and zoom into the project lines. Click on each to learn more. This is for map is informational purposes and is not intended to collect comments. No data to display...
To learn more about all of these projects, hover your mouse over the following interactive map and zoom into the project lines. Click on each to learn more. No data to display...
On a scale of 1 - 10, how much do you support pedestrian improvements on these NCDOT roads? This includes filling missing sidewalk sections, improving pedestrian crossings and frequency, and in some cases, providing more separation from traffic. Click on the image to enlarge and explore. Also see clickable map at the bottom of the page for more map exploration options. Average
1 (do not support)
10 (it's fantastic)
Loading more report objects...
https://publicinput.com/report?id=13616
35/35
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
CLOSE THE GAP APPENDIX 7: DESTINATION AND EQUITY SCORE AND METHODOLOGY
Close the GAP Destination and Equity Score Methodology The goal of the destination + equity score was to identify the essential places that people need to access and the areas of the City with the greatest equity need. Using roadway databases from NCDOT’s Statewide System & Non-System Road Routes, Buncombe County Centerlines, and City of Asheville’s Street Network, the team developed a destination, an equity, and a combined destination and equity score (DES) for each roadway segment in the City. For the destination component, we wanted to know: Does the corridor provide access to essential services and resources? And for the equity component, we wanted to know: Does the corridor provide greater access to a high equity need area? What follows is the process we developed to answer these two questions.
Destination Score Does the corridor provide access to essential services and resources? To arrive at that answer, we identified key destinations (such as grocery stores, schools, homeless shelters, parks - see the list below for all destinations considered), developed a score, and assigned that to each corridor in the City. We mapped this information for City-owned and NCDOT-owned roads, but not interstates (as interstates are not accessible to pedestrians). This analysis helped us to understand the places people need to reach and the corridors are illustrated in Map 10 of the main document.
DES Step-by-Step Process For the destination scoring process, each roadway received a score based on its proximity to key destinations. Many segments have more than one ranking, because most segments are close to more than one destination.
Key Destinations The key destinations included in the DES are those recommended for ADA Transition Plans and the additional destinations identified by the project team. The goal was to Identify parcels (for large destinations such as AB Tech or UNCA) and points (such as schools or grocery stores) for the destinations. Additionally, the planning team agreed on the number of points each Appendix 9: Destination and Equity Methodology 1of 20
destination would receive as well as the road segment buffer. Destinations, points, and buffers in the analysis include:
Destination Group
Points
Buffer / Other
Point / Parcel
Source
ART Lines
10
1/8 Mile
Line
COA Art Lines
Buncombe County Facilities
3
.25 Mile
Point
BC Land Class, Parcel Ownership
COA Parks
10
.25 Mile
Point
COA Parks and Rec, BC Land Class
Faith Communities
3
⅛ Mile
Point
Point
Greenway Access Points (Existing)
10
.25 Mile
Point
COA Greenway Lines (Point file created for access areas)
Grocery Store (Full Service)
10
.25 Mile
Point
BC Land Class, Internet Research
Higher Education
10
.25 Mile
Parcel
Buncombe County Parcel Ownership, Land Class
Homeless Services
10
.25 Mile
Point
COA Affordable Housing Guide; General internet research
Hospitals
10
.25 Mile
Point
NC DHHS Licenced Facilities
IFB Solutions (formerly Industries for the Blind)
10
.25 Miles
Point
Local knowledge
Appendix 9: Destination and Equity Methodology 2of 20
K-12 Schools
10
.25 Mile
Point
NC OneMap
Libraries
10
.25 Mile
Point
Buncombe County Public Libraries
Manufactured Housing Parks (Not single homes)
10
.25 Mile
Point
BC Land Class
Multifamily Housing (not subsidized)
5
.25 Mile
Point
BC Land Class, Internet research
NC Department of Motor Vehicles
10
.25 Mile
Point
Internet confirmation
Nursing Homes, Other Facilities
3
.25 Mile
Point
NC DHHS Licenced Facilities
Polling Locations
10
.25 Mile
Point
Buncombe County Board of Elections
Retail Corridors
3
1/16 Mile
Line
BC Land Class
Subsidized Housing
10
.25 Mile
Point
BC Land Class, socialserve.com , COA Affordable Housing Guide, General internet research
Step One: Land Use Classification As a starting point to identify all key destinations, the team identified the existing land use of each parcel using Buncombe County’s Land Class code found in Buncombe County parcel records (https://gis.buncombecounty.org/buncomap/classcode.htm).
Appendix 9: Destination and Equity Methodology 3of 20
Image: Classification by Buncombe County’s Land Class code.
Step Two: Refine Destinations Using Other Databases, Manual Work, and Checking, Parcels to Points After the team identified locations using Buncombe County’s Land Class code, the team then used online sources such as Google Maps, other databases (NC OneMap, NC Department of Health and Human Services, Buncombe County Board of Elections, etc.) and general internet research to confirm and identify destinations.
Appendix 9: Destination and Equity Methodology 4of 20
Image: Example of points identified using Google Maps Since some identified locations started out as parcels, the team used a geoprocessing tool to convert parcels to points. Most destinations became points, except for large destinations with multiple entrances, such as AB Tech and UNCA.
Appendix 9: Destination and Equity Methodology 5of 20
Image: Subsidized housing parcels (shaded red areas) to points (red points) example.
Step Three: Buffering Once the team identified a point or a parcel for each destination, the team used the ArcGIS buffering tool to identify the agreed upon buffer around each parcel or point.
Image: Subsidized housing parcels (shaded red areas) to points (red points) example.
Appendix 9: Destination and Equity Methodology 6of 20
Image: Example of a .25 mile buffer around grocery stores in West Asheville.
Step Four: Assign Points to Roadway Segments Using GIS tools, the team selected the road segments that fell within the buffers for each group of destinations (e.g. grocery stores) and assigned points to each of the roadway segments within the buffer. While the image below show that interstates where selected, these were backed out of the analysis at a later point.
Appendix 9: Destination and Equity Methodology 7of 20
Image: Example of a roadway segments within the .25 mile buffer around grocery stores in West Asheville.
Step Five: Calculate Score After segments received scores for applicable destinations, the team calculated the total scores for each segment. For example, a segment near a school, a grocery store, and a library would have received a score of 30 (ten points for each destination). Mapping the total score allowed us to see destination hot spots (suchs as downtown Asheville).
Appendix 9: Destination and Equity Methodology 8of 20
Image: The roadway segments selected in the grocery store buffer received 10 points. As shown in the table, some of these roadway segments also received 10 points for proximity to schools, subsidized housing, and polling locations.
Appendix 9: Destination and Equity Methodology 9of 20
Image: Map showing the total destination score for City of Asheville streets. The orange and yellow areas represent a higher concentration of destinations.
Appendix 9: Destination and Equity Methodology 10of 20
Image: Map showing the total destination score for NCDOT roadways, minus Interstates. The orange and yellow areas represent a higher concentration of destinations.
Equity Score Does the corridor provide greater access to a high equity need area? To arrive at that answer, we used data from the U.S. Census (2019 American Community Survey) to score areas of the City known as Block Groups. This is a geographic area designated by the U.S. Census that typically represents between 600 and 3,000 people. Each Block Group received an equity score based on the following values: ●
Median household income because People with lower incomes have fewer means to pay for the high costs of transportation such as car ownership (and are therefore more likely to walk or use public transportation).
Appendix 9: Destination and Equity Methodology 11of 20
●
●
● ● ● ●
Percent of the population that is BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color), because people of color in our city have been disproportionately affected by housing and transportation policy. Percent of the population that is considered living below poverty. Those affected by poverty are more likely to walk and use public transportation as a primary form of transportation. Percent of households with no vehicles available to them. People without vehicles are more likely to rely on walking and public transit for transportation. Percent of the population above the age of 65, because, as people age, they may be more likely to stop driving a car. Percent of the population living with a disability, because many people with a disability cannot, or choose not to, drive. Percent of the population with limited English proficiency, because using transportation systems, particularly driving, is challenging to those with limited English proficiency.
These factors are commonly called equity indicators as they can be used to evaluate levels of inequity in the community and measure progress towards a more equitable future. Each equity indicator received a 1 (lowest equity need / blue areas on the maps) to 5 (highest equity need / red areas on the map). The team then combined each indicator to determine the total equity score. The equity score for each Asheville Census Block Group is illustrated in Map 9 in the main document and below. Also included below is an individual map of each equity factor evaluated in the analysis.
Appendix 9: Destination and Equity Methodology 12of 20
Total Equity Score (Orange and red areas have a higher equity need)
Appendix 9: Destination and Equity Methodology 13of 20
Median Income
Appendix 9: Destination and Equity Methodology 14of 20
Percent of Households Without Access to a Vehicle
Appendix 9: Destination and Equity Methodology 15of 20
Percent of Population 65 or Older
Appendix 9: Destination and Equity Methodology 16of 20
Percent of Population that is Black, Indigenious, and Other People of Color (BIPOC)
Appendix 9: Destination and Equity Methodology 17of 20
Percent of Adult Population with a Disability
Appendix 9: Destination and Equity Methodology 18of 20
Percent of Population with Limited English Proficiency
Appendix 9: Destination and Equity Methodology 19of 20
Percent of Population at or Below Poverty
Appendix 9: Destination and Equity Methodology 20of 20
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
CLOSE THE GAP APPENDIX 8: GREENWAY PLAN CONSTRAINT ANALYSIS
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
CITY OF ASHEVILLE GREENWAY PLAN CONSTRAINT ANALYSIS
]
*These layers were not used as layers of the constraint model, but can be overlaid on the constraints (along with other data not listed) to show priorities in alignment destinations.
INFRASTRUCTURE/SOCIAL
PERMITTING/ENVIRONMENTAL
• • • • •
• • • • •
Streets NCDOT Bridges Park Parcels Publicly-Owned Parcels State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) District Boundaries
Steep Slopes ( >20% ) Regional Underground Storage Tanks Hazardous Waste Sites Brownfields Rare, Threatened, Endangered Species Review (Medium to Very High Accuracy) • Railway Rights-of-Way
HYDROLOGY • Floodway • Stream lines
Low Constraint
High Constraint
GIS data layers were overlaid to determine areas of constraint in constructing a greenway along a particular route. A constraint model using this data to create a grid of equally-sized hexagons (0.5 acre) across the Asheville area shows a visual of where a variety of constraints exist that may create obstacles to greenway construction. These contraints may affect constructability either through permitting, increased cost, and/or environmental barriers.
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
CLOSE THE GAP APPENDIX 9: CORRIDOR SPECIFIC ANALYSIS: BEAVERDAM AND WEST ASHEVILLE GREENWAY
NORTH SECTION ‘
Opportunity Large land owners. These locations consist of one golf course and two cemeteries. Constraint Rail underpass does not have room for a greenway, would require an additional box culvert. See exhibit 1
Constraint Steep grade
Rail ROW ranges from 50-74 Rail to Trail necessary
Rail ROW ranges from 75-99 Rail to Trail likely required
Opportunity Rail line is largely hugging the east side of the ROW for this yellow section, possibly leaving room for a greenway on the west side.
Rail ROW ranges from 100150’ Rail with trail may be possible, consider grades
West Asheville Greenway, Desktop Analysis
0 7 .0 1 .2 0 2 0 1
SOUTH SECTION Rail ROW ranges from 50-74 Rail to Trail necessary
Rail ROW ranges from 75-99 Rail to Trail likely required
Constraint Underpass does not allow clearance for greenway 25’ from rail line.
Rail ROW ranges from 100150’ Rail with trail may be possible, consider grades
Opportunity Large land owner, consider moving alignment up toward retail. See exhibit 2.
Greenway may have to cross railroad at at grade road crossing here to be on the east side of the rail line.
Rail and highway share ROW in this section. There is 30-45’ of ROW east of the centerline of the rail line.
Constraint Second rail line starts and reduces ROW available in this location.
West Asheville Greenway, Desktop Analysis
0 7 .0 1 .2 0 2 0 2
E X H I B I T 1 - RA I L U N D E R PA SS
Constraint Bridge needed to cross creek.
INE
L AD O LR
RAI
Constraint No clearance for greenway under bridge. New underpass needed.
INE
L AD O LR
RAI
West Asheville Greenway, Desktop Analysis
0 7 .0 1 .2 0 2 0 3
E
IN DL
OA R IL
RA
Opportunity Access to Retail.
ON
B
OP TIO
Constraint No clearance for greenway under bridge if rail is in use.
RAI L
RO AD
LIN
E
OP TI
NA
RAI L
RO AD
LIN
E
Early analysis shows a possible clearance of 15-20’ in height 25’ away from rail. Grading would have to consider bridge abutment.
West Asheville Greenway, Desktop Analysis
0 7 .0 1 .2 0 2 0 4
GAP- BEAVERDAM GREENWAY FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS 07.01.2020
NO EASY THROUGH ACCESS
NO THROUGH ACCESS
ROW TOO NARROW
0
N
400
1"=800'
800
1,600
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
CLOSE THE GAP APPENDIX 10: ADA AND PEDESTRIAN PROJECT LISTS
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
APPENDIX 10: ADA PROJECT LISTS Table Column Descriptions 1.
Map ID
2. Road Name 3. Segment 4. Current Funding Status Not Funded Funded: Noted as funded as a City of Asheville bond project, a City or NCDOT Resurfacing project, or a funded NCDOT project (which may also include City matching funds) Partial Funding: Overlapping funded project (noted) does not cover all of the corridor needs. Planned (MTP): This project has been identified in the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) Study Complete: A corridor study* has been completed with recommendations to move forward into further study and/or project development. 5. Next Step for Project Implementation Fund Planning*: Additional planning is required to better define the scope of corridor recommendations to address overlapping land use and transportation needs. Fund Feasibility Study: Due to observed corridor constraints, additional feasibility analysis is needed to refine the project limits and details. Fund Preliminary Engineering: These projects will require preliminary engineering (30% design) to further evaluate right-of-way needs, constraints and cost. Submit for Prioritization: The next step for unfunded but planned MTP projects is prioritization through the FBRMPO and NCDOT’s SPOT process. Design, Right-of-Way, Construction: Next step for funded projects. 6. Project Description: Initial description based on preliminary project needs assessment or, if funded, the associated project scope and description. 7. Project Pedestrian/ADA Needs: Initial assessment to identify needs related to sidewalk gaps, existing sidewalk conditions (including ADA non-compliance) and pedestrian crossings. 8. ADA Condition Scan: Results of a desktop scan of existing sidewalks along the corridor to assess ADA compliance of existing sidewalks. 1 – ADA Compliant*: 2 – Good Condition: 3 – Fair Condition: 4 – Moderate Condition: 5 – Poor Condition:
Remove from ADA Transition Plan Needs Compliance Review Needs ADA Upgrades in Spots (Specific Locations) Needs Many ADA Upgrades Needs Significant ADA Upgrades (Full Sidewalk Reconstruction for Much of the Corridor) *Note: Based on the Corridor Approach, no corridors were deemed fully compliant as full detailed ADA assessments have not been conducted as part of this process. For more on the Corridor Approach and when this assessment will be completed, see Chapter 6 of the report.
1
Woodfin Beaver Lake
Mile
NORTH
6.D 9.I
26
4.F 5.H
9.B 2.E 4.H
8.D
3.G
4.I
240
6.F
2.D 6.E 3.E 2.C 4.G 7.B 4.A 8.C 4.C 5.A 7.A 6.B 9.L
5.I
8.E 8.A
9.A
9.J 3.F
40
9.K
40
2.A 4.B 8.G
3.B 3.A240 5.B 40
9.C 9.M
2.B
4.J
4.D Biltmore Estate
1.A
3.C
9.D 9.E 9.F 5.C 4.E
6.A 8.B
6.C
Biltmore Forest
2.A 9.M 8.G 4.B 9.E 9.F 9.D
26
3.D
DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE
6.E
NCDOT: ADA PROJECTS
240
3.E
2.C 8.C
5.C
8.F
2.D
4.G
Biltmore Forest
9.G
7.B
5.E
5.A
Groups 1 and 2
5.D 9.H
Groups 3 and 4
Lake Julian
Groups 5 and 6 Groups 7 and 8 Group 9
4.A
4.C
Downtown Asheville
5.F
City of Asheville Area Cities
5.G
7.A
6.B
9.L 4.B
AVL Regional Airport
2.A
0.5
Mills River
Miles
Fletcher
Map ID #
Segment
Total Score
Tunnel Rd
New Haw Creek Rd to Porters Cove Rd
19
2.A
Biltmore Ave
Southside Ave to Thompson St
18
2.B
Fairview Rd (Alt US 74)
Swannanoa River Rd to School Rd
18
2.C
Merrimon Ave (US 25)
I-240 Interchange
18
2.D
Merrimon Ave (US 25)
I-240 to WT Weaver Blvd
2.E
Patton Ave (US 19/23; Alt US 74)
Johnston Blvd/ Haywood Rd to I-240 Interchange
Tunnel Rd
Chunns Cove to S. Tunnel Rd
Tunnel Rd
Tunnel Rd to Chunns Cove Rd
1.A
3.A
3.B
Road Name
Funding Status
Next Step
Project Description
Pedestrian/ADA Needs
ADA Condition Rating (1-5)
ADA Condition Scan Description
Planned (MTP)
Submit for Prioritization
Access Management Project to include Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Study Complete
Fund Preliminary Eng
Study recommends Biltmore and McDowell Greenway Connector Option A: Remove a travel lane on Biltmore Ave for a sidepath or separated bicycle facility between Southside and Caledonia Road.
Widen Sidewalks (or Sidepath) &/or Buffer from Traffic; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
Fund Planning
Sidewalk on West Side between Swannanoa River Rd and First Signal at Shopping Center. Investigate Pedestrian and Bicycle Crossing Needs at Old Charlotte Highway
Connection to Future Greenway; Residential Housing; Retail and Transit
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
Planned (MTP)
Submit for Prioritization
Road Diet with Complete Streets Elements
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
18
Planned (MTP)
Submit for Prioritization
Road Diet with Complete Streets Elements
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
18
Bond Funded (Partial for Sidewalk Gaps)
Right of Way for Bond
Bond Match; 80% LAPP Funded
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
Study Complete
Fund Preliminary Eng
Study recommends a sidepath (south side) from the Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) Tunnel to I-240; includes roadway and intersection and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & improvements. Widen sidewalk through the interchange to More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades create a multiuse sidepath.
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
Grouped Study Complete
Fund Preliminary Eng
Study recommends a sidepath (south side) from the Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) Tunnel to I-240; includes roadway and intersection and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & improvements. Widen sidewalk through the interchange to More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades create a multiuse sidepath.
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
Study recommends a sidepath (south side) from the Tunnel to I-240; includes roadway and intersection ADA Upgrades; Improved Crossings and Conversion improvements. Widen sidewalk through the interchange to to Greenway create a multiuse sidepath.
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
17
3.C
Tunnel Rd
I-240 Interchange
17
Study Complete
ADA Compliance Review - See Overlapping Greenway Project
3.D
Hendersonville Rd (US 25)
Rock Hill Rd to NC 280
17
Study Complete
Fund Preliminary Eng
See Hendersonville Road Study
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
3.E
Charlotte St
I-240 Interchange
17
Planned (MTP) Fund Short Term ADA Upgrades
Submit for Prioritization
MTP Proposed Modern Roundabout Interchange. Recommend Short Term ADA Signal Upgrades Due to Recent Crashes
Pedestrian Signals and Corridor ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
3.F
Smokey Park Hwy Sand Hill Rd to Old (US 19/23; Alt US Haywood Rd 74)
17
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
3.G
Patton Ave (US 19/23; Alt US 74)
4.A
Biltmore Ave (US Patton Ave to Hilliard 25) Ave
4.B
McDowell St (US 25)
Old Haywood Rd to Johnston Blvd/ Haywood Rd
Entire Street
Fund Planning Submit for Prioritization
Access Management Project to Include Bike/Ped in the MTP (Not Funded)
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
16
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades Possible Road Diet for Reduced Pedestrian Exposure
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
16
Fund Preliminary Eng
Study Recommended the Following Under Biltmore and Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) McDowell Greenway Connector Option B: Remove a travel and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & lane on McDowell Street to provide a sidepath on one More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades side of the street.
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
17
Planned (MTP)
Study Complete
Map ID #
Road Name
Segment
Total Score
Funding Status
Next Step
Project Description
Pedestrian/ADA Needs
ADA Condition Rating (1-5)
ADA Condition Scan Description
Fund Planning
Planning Needed to Evaluate Pedestrian Accomodations Plan
Improved & More Frequent Crossings (Consider Potential for Road Diet to Address Overlapping Bicycle Needs)
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
Submit for Prioritization
Access Management Project To Include Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Fund Planning
Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalk; Ramp Crossing Treatments Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalk; Ramp Crossing and ADA Upgrades; Consider Widening for Sidepath for Treatments and ADA Upgrades; Consider Widening Overlapping Bicycle Needs for Sidepath for Overlapping Bicycle Needs
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Planned (MTP)
Submit for Prioritization
Road Diet with Complete Streets Elements
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
16
Planned (MTP)
Submit for Prioritization
Pedestrian Signals and Corridor ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
Sand Hill Rd to Patton Ave
16
Funded (NCDOT# HL-0003) Construction 2022
Resurfacing+ Project (ADA Upgrades)
Pedestrian Signals and Corridor ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
Haywood Rd
I-240 to Sand Hill Rd
16
Funded (NCDOT# HL-0003) Construction 2022
Resurfacing+ Project (ADA Upgrades)
Pedestrian Signals and Corridor ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
4.J
Sweeten Creek Rd (Alt US 25)
Crayton Rd to Rock Hill Rd
16
Planned (MTP)
Access Management Project To Include Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
5.A
Broadway St
Patton Ave to I-240
15
Widen Sidewalk Where Feasible
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
4.C
S. Charlotte St
I-240 to Biltmore Ave
16
4.D
Hendersonville Rd (US 25)
I-40 to Rock Hill Rd
16
4.E
Hendersonville Rd (US 25)
I-40 Interchange
16
4.F
Merrimon Ave (US 25)
WT Weaver Blvd to Beaverdam Rd
16
4.G
Broadway St
I-240 Interchange
4.H
Haywood Rd
4.I
Entire St
15
Planned (MTP)
Study Complete
Submit for Prioritization
Fund Preliminary Eng
Study recommends parallel greenway along the west side Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) of I-240 connecting to Tunnel Road near southern mall and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & access. Connects to Swannanoa River Road as a sidepath More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades along the east side.
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalk; Ramp Crossing Treatments and ADA Upgrades; Consider Widening East Side for Sidepath for Overlapping Bicycle Needs
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
5.B
S Tunnel Rd
5.C
Hendersonville Rd (US 25)
Biltmore Ave to I-40
15
Fund Planning
Planning Needed to Integrate Planned Projects for Adjoining Road Sections to the North and South
5.D
Long Shoals Rd (NC 146)
Hendersonville Rd to Overlook Dr
15
Fund Planning
Planning Needed to Evaluate Pedestrian Accomodations Plan
Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalk (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.E
Long Shoals Rd (NC 146)
Schenck Parkway to Overlook Dr
15
Fund Planning
Planning Needed to Evaluate Pedestrian Accomodations Plan
Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalk (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
North Side Construction; Submit for Prioritization for Remaining
Planned Access Management Project in MTP to Include Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & Possible Multiuse Sidepath) More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.F
Airport Rd (NC 280)
Watson Rd to Hendersonville Rd
15
Bond Funded for North Side; Planned (MTP) for Remaining
5.G
Airport Rd (NC 280)
Town of Fletcher Boundary
15
Planned (MTP)
Fund Preliminary Eng
Access Management Project To Include Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Partially Funded (NCDOT# BL-0005)
Fund Preliminary Eng for Remainder (Construction 2022 for Section under I-26)
Partially Funded - NCDOT pedestrian improvements from US 19/23 northbound exit ramp to north of SR 1477 (Riverside Drive). Needs sidewalk and crossings for remainder of limits.
Complete Sidewalk One Side (Consider Sidepath for Overlapping Planned Greenway Connection); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.H
Broadway St
WT Weaver Blvd to I-26 Interchange
15
Map ID #
5.I
Road Name
Haywood Rd
Segment
Beverly Rd West to I-240
Total Score
15
Funding Status
Next Step
Funded (NCDOT# HL-0003) Construction 2022
Project Description
Pedestrian/ADA Needs
ADA Condition Rating (1-5)
ADA Condition Scan Description
Resurfacing+ Project (ADA Upgrades)
Pedestrian Signals and Corridor ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
14
Fund Planning
Planning Needed to Evaluate Pedestrian Accomodations Plan
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (Consider Sidepath for Overlapping Planned Greenway Connection) & Widen &/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
Biltmore Ave (US Southside Ave to 25) Hilliard Ave
14
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
6.C
New Haw Creek Rd
Arco Rd to Beverly Rd
14
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
6.D
Merrimon Ave (US 25)
Beaverdam Rd to Wembley Rd
14
Planned (MTP)
Submit for Prioritization
Road Diet with Complete Streets Elements
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
6.E
Broadway St
I-240 to WT Weaver Blvd
14
Planned (MTP)
Submit for Prioritization
Planed modernization project to include a road diet and pedestrian upgrades from Chestnut Street to I-240.
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
6.F
Haywood Rd
Beverly Rd West to Roberts St/Clingman Ave Traffic Cir
14
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
7.A
Clingman Ave
Entire St
13
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
7.B
College St & Tunnel Rd
Charlotte St to Beaucatcher Tunnel
13
Fund Planning
ADA Upgrades; Improved & More Frequent Crossings (Consider Potential for Road Diet to Address Overlapping Bicycle Needs)
Complete Sidewalk Gaps Both Sides; Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades; Consider Connections to Planned Tunnel Road Sidepath (to the East)
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
8.A
Brevard Rd (NC 191)
I-240 to Haywood Rd
12
Fund Planning
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Two Sides with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Two Sides with Transit Stops Enhancements; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
8.B
Sardis Rd (NC 112)
Country Meadows Dr to Sand Hill Rd
12
ROW 2025/ Construction 2028
Roadway Modernization Project from US 19/23 to Brevard Complete Sidewalk Both Sides with Improved & Road (NC 191). Project to Include Complete Sidewalk Both More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades. Consider Sides and Bike Lanes. Multiuse Sidepath to Connect Planned Greenways.
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
8.C
Montford Ave
I-240 Interchange
12
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
8.D
Louisiana Ave
Haywood Rd to Patton Ave
12
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
8.E
Sand Hill Rd
Wendover Rd to Haywood Rd
12
Fund Planning
Confirm Needs with Neighborhoods and Evaluate Future Land Uses along N. Bear Creek Road
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
8.F
Mills Gap Rd
Hendersonville Rd to Alpine Ridge Dr
12
ROW 2022/ Construction 2024
Roadway Modernization Project from US 25 to Weston Road. Project to Include Complete Sidewalk Both Sides and Bike Lanes.
Complete Sidewalk Both Sides with Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades.
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
8.G
Swannanoa River One Way to Bryson St Rd
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
9.A
Amboy Rd Bridge
French Broad River Bridge
11
Funded (NCDOT# U-4739)
ROW 2025/ Construction 2030
Roadway Modernization with Complete Streets (and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)
Needs Sidewalk Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
9.B
N. Louisiana Ave
Patton Ave to north of Hazel Mill Rd
11
Funded (NCDOT# U-6162)
ROW 2025
Roadway modernization project to include completion of sidewalks both sides and bicycle lanes.
Complete Sidewalk Gaps Both Sides with Transit Stops Connections; ADA and Crossing Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
9.C
Wood Ave
Swannanoa River Rd to Future St
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
6.A
Brevard Rd (NC 191)
6.B
I-240 to Stradley Mtn Rd/Ridgefield Blvd
Funded (NCDOT# U-6047)
Funded (NCDOT# U-5834)
12
Map ID #
Road Name
Segment
Total Score
Funding Status
Next Step
Project Description
Pedestrian/ADA Needs
ADA Condition Rating (1-5)
ADA Condition Scan Description
Study Complete
Fund Preliminary Eng
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades (Consider Overlapping Biltmore/McDowell Corridor Study Recommendations) Including a Sidepath between Biltmore Ave and McDowell St.
Complete Sidewalk Gaps Both Sides with Transit Stops Connections; ADA and Crossing Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Study Complete
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades (Consider Overlapping Biltmore/McDowell Corridor Study Recommendations) Including a Sidepath between Biltmore Ave and McDowell St.
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Study Complete
Fund Preliminary Eng
Study Recommends Widening the Sidewalk on the West Side for a Sidepath to Connect to Swannanoa River Greenway to the North and Biltmore Village Sidepath to the South.
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
9.D
All Souls McDowell St to Crescent (US 25) Hendersonville Rd
9.E
Brooke & Lodge St
Entire Street
9.F
Biltmore Ave
Thompson St to Hendersonville Rd US 25
11
9.G
Overlook Dr
NC 146 to Springside Rd
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
9.H
Rosscraggon Rd and Rathfarnham Entire St Rd
11
Fund Preliminary Eng
Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.
Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.
9.I
Beaverdam Rd
Merrimon Ave to Kimberly Ave
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
9.J
Amboy Rd
Entire St
11
ROW 2025/ Construction 2029
Roadway Modernization with Complete Streets (and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)
Needs Sidewalk Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
9.K
Sand Hill Rd (NC 112)
Lake Dr to Sardis Rd
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
9.L
Southside Ave (US 25)
Entire St
11
Fund Preliminary Eng & ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalks B. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gaps (Both Sides) ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
9.M
Biltmore Ave to Bryson St (US 81) Swannanoa River Rd
ROW 2029
Roadway widening and modernization project. Includes complete streets elements (sidewalks/bike lanes and/ or greenway). Project to be coordinated with Swannanoa River Greenway.
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
11
11
11
Funded (NCDOT# U-4739)
Funded (NCDOT# U-6046/5832)
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
1
Woodfin
Mile
Beaver Lake
NORTH
4.G
26
5.Q 5.R
4.H
4.I 3.D
5.O 3.A 240
5.N
5.J 5.K
5.P
240
4.J 40
5.L
4.E 5.M
40
4.F
5.T
4.K
5.S
40
5.A Biltmore Estate
Biltmore Forest
26
DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE COA: ADA PROJECTS Group 1
4.H 4.C 2.B 5.R
5.B
5.C
5.F
5.H 5.G 4.B
5.E
1.A
Group 2 Lake Julian
4.L
Group 3 Group 4
4.D
3.D
Group 5
2.A
Downtown Asheville
3.C
5.I
City of Asheville
4.A
3.A
Area Cities
5.D
3.B
AVL Regional Airport
5.N
0.5 5.K
Mills River
Miles
Fletcher
Map ID #
Road Name
Segment
Clingman Ave/ Haywood St to Biltmore Ave
ADA Condition Rating (1-5)
ADA Condition Scan Description
Review Remaining Corridor for ADA Compliance and Crossing Needs
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
A. Improve Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodations from Southside Ave to Patton Ave B. Crossings and ADA Upgrades for Remaining Corridor
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
Total Score
Funding Status
18
Planned Repaving Project (Includes ADA) Planned Protected Bike Lane Project (College St to Biltmore Ave)
Fund Planning to Address Remaining Pedestrian Needs
ADA Upgrades; Improved & More Frequent Crossings (Consider Potential for Road Diet to Address Overlapping Bicycle Needs)
Partially Funded (NCDOT# EB-5830)
Southside Ave to Patton Ave (Preliminary Engineering Funded) Remaining Sections Need Accessibility Funding
Next Step
Pedestrian Project Descriptions
Pedestrian/ADA Needs
1.A
Patton Ave
2.A
Lexington Ave
Entire St
15
2.B
Haywood St
Entire St
15
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings for Sections Not Included in Recent Improvements
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
3.A
Hilliard Ave
Entire St
14
Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalks B. Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides; Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
3.B
Asheland Ave
Hilliard Ave to Phifer St/ Southside Ave
14
Fund Planning
Low Traffic Volumes and Wide Roadway ROW combined with Underutilized Land Use Make this Corridor a Candidate for a Land Use and Transportation Study
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings (Reduce Pedestrian Crossing Widths)
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
3.C
Asheland Ave
Patton Ave to Hilliard Ave
14
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
3.D
Valley St
College St to Hazzard St
14
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
4.A
Church St
Entire St
12
Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalks (Prioritize East Side Completion) B. Improved Crossings and ADA Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gaps One Side; Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
4.B
Battery Park Ave
Entire St
12
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
4.C
Woodfin & Oak Sts
Entire St
13
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
4.D
College St
Patton Ave to Spruce St
12
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
4.E
Livingston St
Entire St
12
Fund Planning
Confirm Needs with Livingston Neighborhood
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades; Consider Traffic Calming and Shorter Crossings
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
4.F
Hospital Dr
Entire St
12
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
4.G
Lakeshore Dr
Shorewood Dr to Merrimon Ave
12
ADA Compliance Review
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
4.H
Montford Ave
Entire Street
12
Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
4.I
Chestnut St
Merrimon Ave to Broadway St
12
4.J
Kenilworth Rd
Tunnel Rd to Pickwick Rd
12
Fund Preliminary Eng
A. Spot Sidewalks B. Sidewalk Extension from Aurora Dr to Beaucatcher Rd (Approx 1800 ft); Plus 2nd Side Spot Sidewalk for Transit; Crossings and ADA Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
4.K
Fairview Rd
Sweeten Creek Rd to School Rd
12
Fund Planning
A. Spot Sidewalks B. 2nd Side Spot Sidewalk for Transit Connections; Crossings and ADA Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
4.L
College St
Charlotte St to Spruce St
12
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Map ID #
Road Name
Segment
Total Score
Funding Status
Next Step
Pedestrian Project Descriptions
Pedestrian/ADA Needs
ADA Condition Rating (1-5)
ADA Condition Scan Description
5.A
Shiloh Rd
Entire St
11
Fund Planning
Confirm Needs with Shiloh Neighborhood
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.B
Battle Square
Entire St
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.C
Walnut St
Entire St
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
5.D
Coxe Ave
Entire St
11
Southside Ave to Patton Ave Preliminary Engineering Funded) Remaining Sections Need Accessibility Funding
A. Improve Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodations from Southside Avenue to Patton Avenue B. Crossings and ADA Upgrades for Remaining Corridor
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.E
Wall St
Entire St
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.F
O'Henry Ave
Entire St
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.G
Otis St
Entire St
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.H
N French Broad Ave
Entire St
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.I
S French Broad Ave
Patton Ave to Hilliard Ave
11
ADA Compliance Review Evaluate Future Bike/Ped Connection Needs Due to I-26
A. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades B. Possible Additional Needs to Connect to New Greenway (I-26 Project)
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.J
Roberts St
Lyman St/ Clingman Ave Ext north to Traffic Cir
11
Fund Preliminary Eng
Sidewalk One Side
Sidewalk and Crossings
5.K
Depot St
Livingston St to Lyman St/ Clingman Ave Ext
11
Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.L
Victoria Rd
Hospital Dr to Fernihurst Dr
11
Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.M
Victoria Rd
Fernihurst Dr to Meadow Rd
11
Fund Preliminary Eng & ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalks B. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.N
S French Broad Ave
Hilliard Ave to Livingston St
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.O
Riverside Dr
I-240 to I-26 Ramp
12
ADA Compliance Review
Recently Constructed
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
5.P
State St
Entire Street
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.Q
Murdock Ave
Entire Street
11
Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.R
Hill St
Montford Ave to Atkinson St
11
Fund Planning
2nd Side Spot Sidewalk for Transit Connections; Crossings and ADA Upgrades
Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
5.S
Wood Ave Wood Ave and and Cedar St Cedar St
11
Fund Preliminary Eng & ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalks B. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap One Side with Transit Stops Connections; ADA and Crossing Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.T
Short McDowell St
11
Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
Meadow Rd to McDowell St
Partially Funded (NCDOT# EB-5831)
Partially Funded (Neighborhood Greenway)
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
APPENDIX 10: PEDESTRIAN PROJECT LISTS Table Column Descriptions 1.
Map ID
2. Road Name 3. Segment 4. Current Funding Status Not Funded Funded: Noted as funded as a City of Asheville bond project, a City or NCDOT Resurfacing project, or a funded NCDOT project (which may also include City matching funds) Partial Funding: Overlapping funded project (noted) does not cover all of the corridor needs. Planned (MTP): This project has been identified in the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) Study Complete: A corridor study* has been completed with recommendations to move forward into further study and/or project development. 5. Next Step for Project Implementation Fund Planning*: Additional planning is required to better define the scope of corridor recommendations to address overlapping land use and transportation needs. Fund Feasibility Study: Due to observed corridor constraints, additional feasibility analysis is needed to refine the project limits and details. Fund Preliminary Engineering: These projects will require preliminary engineering (30% design) to further evaluate right-of-way needs, constraints and cost. Submit for Prioritization: The next step for unfunded but planned MTP projects is prioritization through the FBRMPO and NCDOT’s SPOT process. Design, Right-of-Way, Construction: Next step for funded projects. 6. Project Description: Initial description based on preliminary project needs assessment or, if funded, the associated project scope and description. 7. Project Pedestrian/ADA Needs: Initial assessment to identify needs related to sidewalk gaps, existing sidewalk conditions (including ADA non-compliance) and pedestrian crossings. 8. ADA Condition Scan: Results of a desktop scan of existing sidewalks along the corridor to assess ADA compliance of existing sidewalks. 1 – ADA Compliant*: 2 – Good Condition: 3 – Fair Condition: 4 – Moderate Condition: 5 – Poor Condition:
Remove from ADA Transition Plan Needs Compliance Review Needs ADA Upgrades in Spots (Specific Locations) Needs Many ADA Upgrades Needs Significant ADA Upgrades (Full Sidewalk Reconstruction for Much of the Corridor) *Note: Based on the Corridor Approach, no corridors were deemed fully compliant as full detailed ADA assessments have not been conducted as part of this process. For more on the Corridor Approach and when this assessment will be completed, see Chapter 6 of the report.
1
Woodfin Beaver Lake
Mile
NORTH
6.D
26
2.C 8.D
5.C 6.C
7.B 8.C
2.B 7.A
2.A
240
9.A
240
8.G 7.C
5.G
3.C
4.E 8.F 9.E
40
8.H
4.D 3.F
1.A 7.E
3.D
7.D
9.L
9.C
40
6.A
1.B
5.A
40
8.A 2.D
9.K 9.J
5.B
5.F 4.B
9.D 9.B 6.B
4.A
4.C
6.E
5.A
6.A 8.A
8.E
Biltmore Estate
Biltmore Forest
9.I 3.B
4.E 9.J 9.K
26
3.E
DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE
6.C
9.H
2.B
Biltmore Forest
8.B 3.A
NCDOT: PEDESTRIAN PROJECTS Groups 1 and 2
9.G
7.A
5.F
Groups 3 and 4
Lake Julian
Groups 5 and 6 Groups 7 and 8 Group 9
5.E
Downtown Asheville City of Asheville
5.D
AVL Regional Airport
9.A
0.5 4.E
Mills River
Miles
9.F
Area Cities
Fletcher
Map ID #
Road Name
Segment
Total Score
Funding Status
Next Step
Project Description
Pedestrian/ADA Needs
ADA Condition Rating (1-5)
ADA Condition Scan Description
19
Funded (NCDOT# U-5190) Note: Overlapping Access Management Project (NCDOT# U-5972)
Right of Way 20222023
Sidewalk (One Side) and Crossings
Sidewalk (One Side) and Crossings; ADA Compliance Review
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
1.A
Leicester Hwy
Patton Ave to Old County Home Rd
1.B
Tunnel Rd
New Haw Creek Rd to Porters Cove Rd
19
Planned (MTP)
Submit for Prioritization
Access Management Project to include Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
2.A
Patton Ave
Johnston Blvd/ Haywood Rd to I-240 Interchange
18
Bond Funded (Partial for Sidewalk Gaps)
Right of Way for Bond
Bond Match; 80% LAPP Funded
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
2.B
Merrimon Ave
I-240 to WT Weaver Blvd
18
Planned (MTP)
Submit for Prioritization
Road Diet with Complete Streets Elements
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
2.C
Merrimon Ave
WT Weaver Blvd to Beaverdam Rd
Grouped
Planned (MTP)
Submit for Prioritization
Road Diet with Complete Streets Elements
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
2.D
Fairview Rd
Swannanoa River Rd to School Rd
18
Fund Planning
Sidewalk on West Side between Swannanoa River Road and First Signal at Shopping Center. Investigate Pedestrian and Bicycle Crossing Needs at Old Charlotte Highway
Connection to Future Greenway; Residential Housing; Retail and Transit
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
3.A
Sweeten Creek Rd
NC 280 to City Limit
17
Funded (NCDOT# U-2801A)
ROW 2024/ Construction 2027
Cross Section TBD (Likely 3 Lane w/ Pedestrian Facility OR Limited to Intersection Improvements)
Needs Sidewalk Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
3.B
Sweeten Creek Rd
Just south of Edgewood Rd Ext to Blue Ridge Parkway
17
Funded (NCDOT# U-2801A)
ROW 2024/ Construction 2027
Cross Section TBD (Likely 3 Lane w/ Pedestrian Facility OR Limited to Intersection Improvements)
Needs Sidewalk Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
3.C
Patton Ave
Old Haywood Rd to Johnston Blvd/ Haywood Rd
17
Planned (MTP)
Submit for Prioritization
Access Management Project to include Bike/Ped in the MTP (Not Funded)
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
3.D
Smokey Park Hwy
Sand Hill Rd to Old Haywood Rd
17
Fund Planning
Planning Needed to Evaluate Pedestrian Accommodations Plan
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
3.E
Hendersonville Rd
Rock Hill Rd to NC 280
17
Study Complete
Fund Preliminary Eng
See Hendersonville Road Study
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
3.F
Tunnel Rd
Chunns Cove to S. Tunnel Rd
17
Study Complete
Fund Preliminary Eng
Study Recommends a Sidepath (South Side) from the Tunnel to I-240; Includes Roadway and Intersection Improvements. Widen Sidewalk through the Interchange to Create a Multiuse Sidepath.
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
4.A
Sweeten Creek Rd
Crayton Rd to Rock Hill Rd
16
Planned (MTP)
Submit for Prioritization
Access Management Project to include Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
4.B
Hendersonville Rd
I-40 Interchange
16
Fund Planning
Planning Needed to Integrate Planned Projects for Adjoining Road Sections to the North and South
Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalk; Ramp Crossing Treatments and ADA Upgrades; Consider Widening for Sidepath for Overlapping Bicycle Needs
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
4.C
Hendersonville Rd
I-40 to Rock Hill Rd
16
Submit for Prioritization
Access Management Project to include Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Planned (MTP)
Map ID #
4.D
Road Name
Tunnel Rd
Segment
Tunnel Rd to Chunns Cove Rd
4.E
McDowell St
Entire St
5.A
Swannanoa River Rd
Bryson St to HWY 70
5.B
Sweeten Creek Rd
Brook St to Crayton Rd
5.C
Broadway St
WT Weaver Blvd to I-26 Interchange
5.D
Airport Rd
Watson Rd to I-26 Ramps
5.E
Airport Rd
5.F
Hendersonville Rd
5.G
6.A
S Tunnel Rd
Watson Rd to Hendersonville Rd
Biltmore Ave to I-40
Entire St
Project Description
Pedestrian/ADA Needs
ADA Condition Rating (1-5)
Study Complete
Fund Preliminary Eng
Study Recommends a Sidepath (South Side) from the Tunnel to I-240; Includes Roadway and Intersection Improvements. Widen Sidewalk through the Interchange to Create a Multiuse Sidepath.
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
16
Study Complete
Fund Preliminary Eng
Study Recommended the Following Under Biltmore and McDowell Greenway Connector Option B: Remove a Travel Lane on McDowell Street to Provide a Sidepath on One Side of the Street.
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
15
Funded (NCDOT# U-6046/5832)
ROW 2029
Roadway Widening and Modernization Project. Includes Complete Streets Elements (Sidewalks/Bike Lanes and/ or Greenway). Project to be Coordinated with Swannanoa River Greenway.
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Planned (MTP)
Fund Planning
Modernize Roadway by Adding Turn Lanes; Access Management and Intersection Improvements with Complete Streets Elements.
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (Consider Sidepath for Overlapping Planned Neighborhood Greenway Connection); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Fund Preliminary Eng for Remainder (Construction 2022 for Section under I-26)
Partially Funded - NCDOT Pedestrian Improvements from US 19/23 Northbound Exit Ramp to North of SR 1477 (Riverside Drive). Needs Sidewalk and Crossings for Remainder of Limits.
Complete Sidewalk One Side (Consider Sidepath for Overlapping Planned Greenway Connection); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Total Score
16
15
Funding Status
Next Step
ADA Condition Scan Description
15
Partially Funded (NCDOT# BL-0005)
15
Planned (MTP)
Fund Preliminary Eng
Access Management Project to include Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
15
Bond Funded for North Side; Planned (MTP) for Remaining
North Side Construction; Submit for Prioritization for Remaining
Planned Access Management Project in MTP to include Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
15
Fund Planning
Planning Needed to Integrate Planned Projects for Adjoining Road Sections to the North and South
Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalk; Ramp Crossing Treatments and ADA Upgrades; Consider Widening East Side for Sidepath for Overlapping Bicycle Needs
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
15
Study Complete
Fund Preliminary Eng
Study Recommends Parallel Greenway along the West Side of I-240 Connecting to Tunnel Road Near Southern Mall Access. Connects to Swannanoa River Road as a Sidepath along the East Side.
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Funded (NCDOT# U-4739)
ROW 2025/ Construction 2029
Roadway Modernization Project Currently in the STIP (Likely Delayed); to include Bike/Ped Improvements.
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (Consider Sidepath for Overlapping Planned Neighborhood Greenway Connection); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Widening Project to include Sidewalks and Bicycle Facilities.
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (Consider Sidepath for Future Greenway Connection); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Planed Modernization Project to include a Road Diet and Pedestrian Upgrades from Chestnut Street to I-240.
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
Meadow Rd
Entire St
14
6.B
Sand Hill Rd
Smoky Park Hwy to Lake Dr
14
Funded (NCDOT# U-6037)
ROW 2025/ Construction 2028
6.C
Broadway St
I-240 to WT Weaver Blvd
14
Planned (MTP)
Submit for Prioritization
Map ID #
6.D
Road Name
Merrimon Ave
Segment
Beaverdam Rd to Wembley Rd
Total Score
14
Funding Status
Planned (MTP)
Next Step
Submit for Prioritization
Pedestrian/ADA Needs
ADA Condition Rating (1-5)
Road Diet with Complete Streets Elements
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Project Description
ADA Condition Scan Description
6.E
Brevard Rd
I-240 to Stradley Mtn Rd/Ridgefield Blvd
14
Fund Planning
Planning Needed to Evaluate Pedestrian Accommodations Plan
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (Consider Sidepath for Overlapping Planned Greenway Connection) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
7.A
College St & Tunnel Rd
Charlotte St to Beaucatcher Tunnel
13
Fund Planning
ADA Upgrades; Improved & More Frequent Crossings (Consider Potential for Road Diet to Address Overlapping Bicycle Needs)
Complete Sidewalk Gaps Both Sides; Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades; Consider Connections to Planned Tunnel Road Sidepath (to the East)
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
7.B
Riverside Dr
I-26 Ramp to Broadway St
13
ROW 2022/ Construction 2024
Widening Project to include Sidewalk and Multiuse Path for Overlapping Planned Greenway
Sidewalks and Multiuse Path for Overlapping Planned Greenway
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
7.C
New Haw Creek Rd
Tunnel Rd to Arco Rd
13
Fund Preliminary Eng
Sidewalk (South Side of New Haw Creek Road)
Needs Sidewalk and Crossings
7.D
Chunns Cove Rd and Piney Mountain Rd
Tunnel Rd to Bella Vista Retirement
13
Fund Preliminary Eng
Sidewalk (West Side of Chunns Cove) and Crossing at Piney Mountain Drive
Needs Sidewalk and Crossings. Consider extending to new planned development on Piney Mountain Drive
7.E
Johnston Blvd
Patton Ave to Cedar Hill Rd
13
A. NCDOT# EB-5944: Complete Sidewalks and Crossings from Patton Avenue to Iona Circle. Needs Sidewalk and Crossings B. Consider Extending Sidewalk Work Past School to Estelle Park Drive.
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
8.A
Swannanoa River Rd
One Way to Bryson St
12
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
8.B
Mills Gap Rd
Hendersonville Rd to Alpine Ridge Dr
12
ROW 2022/ Construction 2024
Roadway Modernization Project from US 25 to Weston Road. Project to include Complete Sidewalk Both Sides and Bike Lanes.
Complete Sidewalk Both Sides with Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades.
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
8.C
Old County Home Rd
Entire St
12
Fund Feasibility Study
Sidewalk and Crossings with 2nd Side Spot Sidewalk for Transit. Include Overlapping Neighborhood Greenway Treatments
Complete Sidewalk One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades. Include Overlapping Neighborhood Greenway Treatments
8.D
Broadway St
I-26 Interchange
12
Funded (NCDOT# BL0005)
Construction 2022
Construct Pedestrian Improvements from US 19/23 Northbound Exit Ramp to North of SR 1477 (Riverside Drive)
Sidewalk or Multiuse Path on the South Side
8.E
Sardis Rd
Country Meadows Dr to Sand Hill Rd
12
Funded (NCDOT# U-6047)
ROW 2025/ Construction 2028
Roadway Modernization Project from US 19/23 to Brevard Road (NC 191). Project to Include Complete Sidewalk Both Sides and Bike Lanes.
Complete Sidewalk Both Sides with Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades. Consider Multiuse Sidepath to Connect Planned Greenways.
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
8.F
Brevard Rd
I-240 to Haywood Rd
12
Fund Planning
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Two Sides with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Two Sides with Transit Stops Enhancements; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
8.G
New Haw Creek Rd. & Middlebrook Rd.
Old Haw Creek Rd. to Tunnel Rd.
12
Fund Preliminary Eng
Sidewalk One Side
Sidewalk and Crossings
8.H
New Haw Creek Rd.
Beverly Rd. to Bell Rd.
12
ROW 2022-2021
Sidewalk One Side
Sidewalk and Crossings
Funded (NCDOT# I-2513D)
Funded (NCDOT# EB-5944) Construction 2021
Funded (NCDOT# U-5834)
Bond Funded
Map ID #
Road Name
Segment
Total Score
Funding Status
Next Step
Project Description
Pedestrian/ADA Needs
9.A
Southside Ave
Entire St
11
Fund Preliminary Eng & ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalks B. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gaps (Both Sides) ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
9.B
Sand Hill Rd
Sardis Rd to Sand Hill School Rd/ W Oakview Rd
11
Fund Preliminary Eng
Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings. Consider Connections to Planned Greenways.
Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.
9.C
Sand Hill Rd
Sand Hill School Rd/W Oakview Rd to Wendover Rd
11
Fund Preliminary Eng
Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings. Consider Connections to Planned Greenways.
Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.
9.D
Sand Hill School Rd
Entire St
11
Fund Preliminary Eng
Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings. Consider Connections to Planned Greenways.
Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.
9.E
Amboy Rd
Entire St
11
Funded (NCDOT# U-4739)
ROW 2025/ Construction 2029
Roadway Modernization with Complete Streets (and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)
Needs Sidewalk Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.
9.F
Airport Rd
Ferncliff Park Dr to Airport Park Rd
11
Planned (MTP)
Submit for Prioritization
Access Management Project - Consider Sidewalk Both Sides; or Sidewalk/Sidepath Combination to Connect to 280 Sidepath in Mills River.
Needs Sidewalk Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.
9.G
Rosscraggon Rd and Rathfarnham Road
Entire St
11
Fund Preliminary Eng
Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.
Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.
9.H
Overlook Dr
Springside Rd to Hendersonville Rd
11
Fund Preliminary Eng
Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.
Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.
9.I
Rock Hill Rd
Entire St
11
Planned (MTP)
Submit for Prioritization
Modernization Project in the MTP; Not Funded Consider Le-An Hurst if Alt Alignment Necessary
Needs Sidewalk One or Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.
9.J
Biltmore Ave
Thompson St to Hendersonville Rd US 25
11
Study Complete
Fund Preliminary Eng
Study Recommends Widening the Sidewalk on the West Side for a Sidepath to Connect to Swannanoa River Greenway to the North and Biltmore Village Sidepath to the South.
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
9.K
All Souls Crescent
McDowell St to Hendersonville Rd
11
Study Complete
Fund Preliminary Eng
Complete Streets Recommendations - See Biltmore McDowell Study
9.L
Amboy Rd Bridge
French Broad River Bridge
11
Funded (NCDOT# U-4739)
ROW 2025/ Construction 2030
Roadway Modernization with Complete Streets (and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)
Needs Sidewalk Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.
ADA Condition Rating (1-5)
ADA Condition Scan Description
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
1
Woodfin
Mile
Beaver Lake
NORTH
4.G 26
4.H 3.D 4.I 1.A
3.J
2.A 2.B
4.C
3.C
240
4.D 4.M
40
40
4.B 3.A
240
3.H 3.B
40
4.E
4.F 4.L
3.I 3.E
4.K
3.F
4.A 3.G Biltmore Estate
Biltmore Forest
26
DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE
4.J
240
3.D
COA: PEDESTRIAN PROJECTS Group 1 Group 2
Lake Julian
Group 3 Group 4
4.I
Downtown Asheville
1.A 2.A
City of Asheville Area Cities
3.A 4.B
AVL Regional Airport
0.5 4.D
Mills River
Miles
Fletcher
Map ID #
Road Name
Segment
Total Score
Funding Status
Partially Funded (NCDOT# EB-5830)
Next Step
Project Description
Pedestrian/ADA Needs
ADA Condition Rating (1-5)
ADA Condition Scan Description
Southside Ave to Patton Ave (Preliminary Engineering Funded) Remaining Sections Need Accessibility Funding
A. Improve Bike and Ped. Accommodations from Southside Ave to Patton Ave B. Crossings and ADA Upgrades for Remaining Corridor
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Revew
A. Spot Sidewalks B. Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides; Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
ROW 2026/Construction 2027
Sidewalk Construction
Needs Sidewalk and Crossings. Note: CoA has bond funds earmarked for housing development and negotiating with HACA. One the Planning Dept Top 5 projects to work on.
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
12
Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Revew
A. Spot Sidewalks (Prioritize East Side Completion) B. Improved Crossings and ADA Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gaps One Side; Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Entire St
12
Fund Planning
Confirm Needs with Livingston Neighborhood
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades; Consider Traffic Calming and Shorter Crossings
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
N Bear Creek Rd
Entire St
12
Fund Planning
Confirm Needs with Deaverview Neighbors and Planned Developments
Sidewalk and Crossings
3.D
Montford Ave
Entire St
12
Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Revew
A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
3.E
London Rd
Entire St
12
Fund Planning
Confirm Needs with Shiloh Neighborhood
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
3.F
Caribou Rd
Entire St
12
Fund Planning
Confirm Needs with Shiloh Neighborhood
Complete Sidewalk Gaps One Side; Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades; Consider Neighborhood Greenway Treatments
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
3.G
West Chapel Entire St Rd
Fund Feasibility Study
Sidewalk and Crossings with 2nd Side Spot Sidewalk for Transit. Include Overlapping Neighborhood Greenway Treatments
Complete Sidewalk One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades. Include Overlapping Neighborhood Greenway Treatments
3.H
Kenilworth Rd
Tunnel Rd to Pickwick Rd
12
Fund Preliminary Eng
A. Spot Sidewalks B. Sidewalk Extension from Aurora Dr to Beaucatcher Rd (Approx 1800 ft); Plus 2nd Side Spot Sidewalk for Transit; Crossings and ADA Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
3.I
Fairview Rd
Sweeten Creek Rd to School Rd
12
Fund Planning
A. Spot Sidewalks B. 2nd Side Spot Sidewalk for Transit Connections; Crossings and ADA Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
3.J
Emma Rd
Craven St/ Hazel Mill Rd to Bingham Rd
12
Fund Planning
Confirm Needs with Emma Neighborhood - Fund Corridor Planning Process; NOTE - NCDOT Coordination for Portion of Roadway
Complete Sidewalk Gaps One Side; Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades; Consider Impact of Planned Parallel Greenway and Bicycle Needs
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
4.A
Shiloh Rd
Entire St
11
Fund Planning
Confirm Needs with Shiloh Neighborhood
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Southside Ave to Patton Ave (Preliminary Engineering Funded) Remaining Sections Need Accessibility Funding
A. Improve Bike and Ped. Accommodations from Southside Ave to Patton Ave B. Crossings and ADA Upgrades for Remaining Corridor
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
1.A
Lexington Ave
Entire St
15
2.A
Hilliard Ave
Entire St
14
2.B
Deaverview Rd
Pisgah View Rd to Patton Ave
14
3.A
Church St
Entire St
3.B
Livingston St
3.C
4.B
Coxe Ave
Entire St
Funded (NCDOT# EB-5965)
12
11
Partially Funded (NCDOT# EB-5831)
Pedestrian Plan COA Streets
Map ID #
Road Name
Segment
Total Score
Roberts St
Lyman St/ Clingman Ave Ext to W. Haywood Street
11
4.D
Depot St
Livingston St to Lyman St/ Clingman Ave Ext
11
4.E
Victoria Rd
Hospital Dr to Fernihurst Dr
4.F
Victoria Rd
4.G
4.C
Funding Status
Next Step
Project Description
Pedestrian/ADA Needs
ADA Condition Rating (1-5)
ADA Condition Scan Description
Fund Preliminary Eng
Sidewalk One Side
Sidewalk and Crossings
Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Revew
A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
11
Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Revew
A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Fernihurst Dr to Meadow Rd
11
Fund Preliminary Eng & ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalks B. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Lakeshore Dr
Elkwood Ave to Shorewood Dr
11
Fund Feasibility Study
Investigate Multiuse Sidepath Connections to Beaver Lake
Sidewalk or Trail and Crossings
4.H
Murdock Ave
Entire Street
11
Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Revew
A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
4.I
Hill St
Montford Ave to Atkinson St
11
Fund Planning
2nd Side Spot Sidewalk for Transit Connections; Crossings and ADA Upgrades
Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
4.J
Springside Rd
Entire St
11
Fund Preliminary Eng & ADA Compliance Review
A. Sidewalks One Side B. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk One Side with ADA and Crossing Upgrades
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
4.K
Wood Ave and Cedar St
Wood Ave and Cedar St
11
Fund Preliminary Eng & ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalks B. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap One Side with Transit Stops Connections; ADA and Crossing Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
4.L
Short McDowell St
Meadow Rd to McDowell St
11
Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Revew
A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
4.M
Oakland Rd.
Entire St
11
Fund Planning
Sidewalk One Side
Sidewalk and Crossings
Partially Funded (Neighborhood Greenway)
Pedestrian Plan COA Streets
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
CLOSE THE GAP APPENDIX 11: FUNDING GUIDE
Overview
This resource lists major eligible funding sources for walking and bicycling infrastructure in North Carolina at all levels: local, state and federal. This resource can be used to advance projects through planning, design,
construction and maintenance. Each funding source has unique eligibility requirements related to applicants, projects, and costs that are not detailed in this document. Note that many of these funding requirements,
eligibility, amounts or programs may change, so the information provided is accurate at the time of publication of this Plan.
Local Sources
An advantage to local sources of funding is that they involve fewer restrictions that dictate how or when the
funds must be used. However, it should be noted that many of these funding sources are tied to the NC Code and thus are subject to change based on legislative changes to local government law. The French Broad River
MPO, UNC School of Government and NCDOT are available to provide the latest information on many of these funding options.
Capital Reserve Funds Funds: capital projects
Any municipal government or public authority may create and maintain a capital reserve fund for issuing bonds, and then use these bonds for any capital project which it is authorized to engage in. The fund is
established by resolution or ordinance of the governing board who establishes the purpose of the funding, the approximate time period and amount the funds will be accumulated and the sources from which it is derived. This fund then allows the governing body to save money for future capital expenditures. These future
expenditures must be listed as specific capital projects, which can then be included in a municipality’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), for instance.
Tourism Product Development Fund Funds: community projects like parks, theaters, greenways and bicycle/pedestrian infrastructure projects
Overnight visitors to Buncombe County pay a lodging tax that generates tax revenue and supports the Tourism Product Development Fund. This revenue is administered by the Buncombe County Tourism Development Authority (TDA), who then in turn provide the funding as grants to the community. While the intent of the
funding is to encourage more tourism-related activities, attracting people to the County to stay overnight, the City can prioritize the development of projects, like greenways, that benefit residents as much as tourists. In
Buncombe County, the funds can be used only for “brick and mortar” projects, design and operational costs are not considered.
The funding requires a 1:1 match. Any organization or business that is considered non-profit is eligible to
apply.
https://www.ashevillecvb.com/product-development/
Funding Sources Page 1 of 20
Capital Project Ordinances Funds: construction projects or acquisition of capital asset
Local governments operate under an annual balanced budget ordinance, and can adopt a capital project
ordinance, that are adopted and administered in accordance with the NC code. A project ordinance allocates
expenditures and revenues for the length of time it takes to complete the project (rather than the municipality
fiscal year). These projects can be financed wholly or in part with the proceeds of bonds, other debt or through
a project involving the construction or acquisition of a capital asset (property of significant value that has useful life for greater than one year). Such ordinances are typically suited for projects that are large in comparison to
the municipality’s annual resources, those that take more than one year to build or acquire, or those that recur irregularly. Funding such projects through the annual budget ordinance presents complications that are more effectively addressed with a capital project ordinance.
Business Improvement Districts Funds: streetscaping and other capital improvement projects within a designated district
The North Carolina code authorizes local governments to define special areas as a way to assess property tax
on properties located within the district, which in turn funds projects and services in said district. These special taxing districts, often known as Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) fund various services and functions including downtown revitalization projects. Such projects may encompass the following: • • • • • •
Maintenance of streets, sidewalks, and other public facilities Downtown marketing and promotion Downtown events
Management of parking
Promotion of downtown business location and expansion Construction of capital improvements
Such a funding source is a consideration for the City of Asheville, as the downtown is well established and may be well-served by such a dedicated funding source.
Other Local Funding Sources
There are various other local funding sources that may be options for funding biking and walking projects in Weaverville. These include: • • •
Local sales and use tax
Transportation sales and use tax
Local fees, charges and assessments
Funding Sources Page 2 of 20
State Sources There are a variety of funding sources that can be used towards bicycle and pedestrian projects in North
Carolina. These funds can be used as matching sources or to fully fund standalone projects. Some funding at the state level originates from the Federal Government.
NCDOT Small Project Fund
NCDOT has division-led funding opportunities that are sourced from statewide funds. Division 13 can provide more information about these opportunities, but they may include:
Small Construction Funds: • • • • •
$250,000 maximum amount per project per Fiscal Year, unless otherwise approved by the Secretary of Transportation Right-of-way should be provided at no cost to NCDOT Utility relocations should be accomplished at no cost to NCDOT Requests received from municipalities, counties, businesses, schools and industrial entities, and NCDOT staff. Request should be submitted to the Division Engineer providing technical information such as location, improvements being requested, timing, etc. for thorough review.
Statewide Contingency Funds:
• • • •
The President Pro Tempore of the Senate, the Speaker of the House and the Secretary of Transportation sponsor project requests from this fund. $12 million fund administered by the Secretary of Transportation. Requests received from municipalities, counties, businesses, schools, citizens, legislative members, and NCDOT staff. Request should include a clear description and justification of the project.
Public Access Funds
• • • • •
Requests received from schools, volunteer fire departments, and industrial entities. $50,000 limit per public school site $25,000 limit for Fire Department & Rescue Squad driveway projects Industrial access project limit $1,000 per employee for new or expanding industry Requests should be submitted to the Division Engineer or Chief Engineer’s Office
Economic Development Funds
• • •
Established to expedite transportation projects that promote commercial growth as well as either job creation or job retention. $2500 per job (new & retained) allowed unless waived by the Secretary of Transportation $400,000 maximum amount per project, unless otherwise approved by the Secretary of Transportation
High Impact/Low Cost Funds
• •
$2500 per job (new & retained) allowed unless waived by the Secretary of Transportation $400,000 maximum amount per project, unless otherwise approved by the Secretary of Transportation Funding Sources Page 3 of 20
•
Each Division is responsible for selecting their own scoring criteria for determining projects funded in this program.
NCDOT Strategic Transportation Investment (STI) Funds: infrastructure projects
The NCDOT Strategic Transportation Investment law was passed in 2013, and it establishes a strategic
framework for prioritizing transportation projects in the state. The STI law allocates available revenues based on data-driven scoring and local input, including analysis of the existing and future conditions, the benefits the
project is expected to provide, the project’s multi-modal characteristics and how the project fits in with local
priorities. This prioritization process is called the Strategic Transportation Prioritization (SPOT), the outcome of
which is the Draft State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The process involves scoring all roadway, public transportation, bicycle, pedestrian, rail, and aviation projects on a number of criteria; the projects are submitted into three different funding categories based on facility and project types (Statewide Mobility,
Regional Impact, Division Needs). Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), Rural Planning Organizations
(RPOs), and the NCDOT Divisions also contribute to the final project score by assigning local priority points to
projects. The French Broad MPO (FBRMPO) selects which projects from a regionally or locally adopted plan are submitted to the scoring competition, and currently the MPO submits 25 new projects for each transportation mode in each SPOT Cycle.
https://frenchbroadrivermpo.org/tip/
https://www.ncdot.gov/initiatives-policies/Transportation/stip/Pages/strategic-transportation-investments.aspx
NCDOT Spot Safety Program
Funds: Among other activities, improvements for pedestrians including signals, crosswalks and curb ramps
The Spot Safety Program is a program of the NCDOT that is intended to fund smaller improvement projects
that address safety, potential safety, and operational issues. The program is funded with state funds; however, any bike/ped projects are funded with Federal Transportation Alternatives Program funds. Other monetary
sources (such as Small Construction or Contingency funds) can assist in funding Spot Safety projects, however, the maximum allowable contribution of Spot Safety funds per project is $400,000. A Safety Oversight
Committee (SOC) reviews and recommends Spot Safety projects to the Board of Transportation (BOT) for
approval and funding. Criteria used by the SOC to select projects for recommendation to the BOT include but
are not limited to: the frequency of correctable crashes, severity of crashes, delay, congestion, number of signal warrants met, effect on pedestrians and schools, division and region priorities, and public interest.
https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Pages/NC-Highway-Safety-Program-and-Projects.aspx
NCDOT Highway Hazard Elimination Program
Funds: larger projects that address safety and potential safety issues
The Hazard Elimination Program is used to develop larger improvement projects to address safety and
potential safety issues. The program is funded with 90% federal funds and 10% state funds. The cost of Hazard Elimination Program projects typically ranges between $400,000 and $1 million. Similar to the Spot Safety Funding Sources Page 4 of 20
Program, the SOC reviews and recommends Hazard Elimination projects to the state BOT for approval and
funding. These projects are prioritized for funding according to a safety benefit to cost (B/C) ratio, with the
safety benefit being based on crash reduction. Once approved and funded by the BOT, these projects become part of the department's STIP.
https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Pages/NC-Highway-Safety-Program-and-Projects.aspx
Governor’s Highway Safety Program
Funds: Among other activities, projects that improve pedestrian and bicycle safety
The Governor’s Highway Safety Program helps fund the efforts of law enforcement agencies, local
governments, community organizations, schools and nonprofits to reduce traffic crashes in North Carolina. These programs are funded on a federal fiscal year basis (Oct. 1 through Sept. 31). Grant applications are
accepted from Jan. 1-31, though rare exceptions may be made to accept applications at other points in the GHSP grant cycle.
https://www.ncdot.gov/initiatives-policies/safety/ghsp/Pages/default.aspx
Powell Bill Funds
Funds: primarily for street resurfacing but also for planning, construction and maintenance of bikeways, greenways or sidewalks
Municipalities receive financial assistance from the State to help pay for construction, maintenance and repair
of their streets. The source of these funds are motor fuel taxes, which are directed into the state Highway Trust
Fund. The NC Code appropriates a certain percentage of this funding to eligible municipalities across the state. The legislation that first established this distribution of funds is known as the Powel Bill and the dollars
distributed are known as Powell Bill funds. Funds are distributed based on a per capita basis (75%) and number of miles on non-state streets (25%).
Consistent with G.S. 136-44.4, a municipality may elect to use its Powell Bill revenue for the following
purposes:
1. Accept all or a portion of the funds allocated to the municipality for use as authorized by G.S. 13641.3(a).
2. Use some or all of its allocation to match federal funds administered by the Department for
independent bicycle and pedestrian improvement projects within the municipality’s limits, or within the area of any metropolitan planning organization or rural transportation planning organization.
3. Elect to have some or all of the allocation reprogrammed for any Transportation Improvement Project currently on the approved project list within the municipality’s limits or within the area of any metropolitan planning organization or rural transportation planning organization.
Most municipalities elect to pursue option 1 above, and in 2015 the state legislature instituted changes to the state law that limit a municipality’s use of the funds. Municipalities that establish their eligibility may use the
funds: “primarily for the resurfacing of streets within the corporate limits of the municipality” (GS 136-41.3(a)). Other allowable purposed include the following: “maintaining, repairing, constructing, reconstructing, or Funding Sources Page 5 of 20
widening of any street or public thoroughfare including bridges, drainage, curb and gutter, and other necessary appurtenances within the corporate limits of the municipality or for meeting the municipality’s proportionate
share of assessments levied for such purposes, or for the planning, construction and maintenance of bikeways, greenways, or sidewalks.”
The Funds are structured in a “use it or lose it” manner such that a municipality may not accumulate more than 10 Powell Bill allocations, otherwise the DOT will deduct an equal amount to the excess from the next
allocation.
https://connect.ncdot.gov/municipalities/State-Street-Aid/Pages/default.aspx
North Carolina Land and Water Fund (NCLWF)
Funds: Among other activities, planning grants for greenways
The NCLWF, formerly known as the Clean Water Management Trust Fund, is a non-regulatory organization
whose focus is on protecting and restoring the State’s land and water resources. They award annual grants to non-profit and governmental organizations for the following purposes: land acquisition, stream restoration,
innovative stormwater, planning and donated property mini-grants. Bike/ped projects are eligible for funding under their planning grants, which funds efforts that: • • •
Enhance or restore degraded waters Protected unpolluted waters
Contribute towards a network of riparian buffers and greenways for environmental, education and recreational benefits
• •
Provide buffers around military bases
Acquire land that represents the ecological diversity of the state or that contributes to the development of a balanced State program of historic properties
•
Facilitate efforts to improve stormwater treatment
https://nclwf.nc.gov/
NC Parks and Recreation Trust Fund (PARTF)
Funds: construction and renovation of facilities in parks and to purchase land for new and existing parks
Managed by the North Carolina State Parks, PARTF provides dollar-for-dollar matching grants to local
governments for parks and recreational projects to serve the public. PARTF is the primary source of funding to
build and renovate facilities in the state parks as well as to buy land for new and existing parks. North Carolina counties and incorporated municipalities are eligible for PARTF grants. Public authorities, as defined by N.C.
General Statute 159-7, are also eligible if they are authorized to acquire land or develop recreational facilities
for the general public. The maximum allowable grant request is $500,000. The Parks and Recreation Authority, a 9-member board appointed by the Governor and the General Assembly, selects which applicants will receive
funding.
https://rrs.cnr.ncsu.edu/partf/ Funding Sources Page 6 of 20
Urban and Community Forestry (U&CF) Grant Program Funds: programs that raise awareness, education, technical skills and community capacity around urban forests
The goal of this program is to enhance the benefits and practice of sustainable management of urban forests. Objectives of the program include the following: •
Reduce the impacts of land-use change and urbanization on forested landscapes in and around urban
areas • • •
Facilitate strategic planting and maintenance of community trees for public benefits Assist communities with establishing and managing their urban forests
Encourage policies and guidelines that sustain urban and community forests for the public's benefit
The grant provides 50% of the project costs, and requires matching funds or in-kind efforts, to encourage
citizen involvement in creating and sustaining urban and community forestry programs. The funding is not intended for the purchase or maintenance of trees; rather, it is to fund programs that raise awareness,
education, technical skills and community capacity around urban trees. Grant amounts range from $2,500 $15,000.
https://www.ncforestservice.gov/Urban/urban_grant_program.htm
North Carolina Safe Routes to School Program
Funds: programming to encourage more walking and biking to school.
Through the North Carolina Safe Routes to School program, the N.C. Department of Transportation works to
make walking and riding a bicycle to school a safe and more appealing option for all children. The statewide, national and international program involves facilitating the planning, development and implementation of
projects and activities to improve safety and reduce traffic, fuel consumption and air pollution near schools.
Several direct initiatives are a result from the program: •
Active Routes to School, which encourages students to be more active on their way to school and while they are at school (no longer an active program, however resources are still available)
•
Let's Go NC! Pedestrian & Bicycle Safety Curriculum, a comprehensive tool designed to help teach and encourage safe and healthy pedestrian and bicycle behaviors in children
•
Safe Routes to School Non-Infrastructure Transportation Alternatives Program, a cost reimbursement program for non-infrastructure programs and activities to local governments, regional planning
organizations, schools and other local or regional entities •
Bike-to-School Day and Walk-to-School Day (typically held in May and October respectively) encourage
students to be physically active all year long and enjoy time with friends and family on the way to school
https://www.ncdot.gov/initiatives-policies/safety/safe-routes-school/Pages/default.aspx
Funding Sources Page 7 of 20
Watch for Me NC Funds: Technical assistance and training for bicycle and pedestrian safety in communities.
Watch for Me NC is a nationally recognized program that focuses on bicycle and pedestrian safety, education and enforcement. Communities selected to participate will receive free law enforcement training, technical assistance and safety tools provided by NCDOT and the UNC Highway Safety Research Center. A new
programming feature for 2020 includes more customized support for each community individually to review planning efforts and share opportunities while troubleshooting challenges.
Watch for Me NC partners will also receive safety-related materials with pedestrian and bicycle safety messages to aid in engagement at public events. Communities may also be eligible to receive advertising such as radio and transit ads. Local government applicants should be able to demonstrate support from local law
enforcement agencies, and if applicable campus police, plus the capacity to participate fully in the program. The City of Asheville has implemented Watch for Me programming in previous years. https://www.watchformenc.org/
NCDOT Bicycle Helmet Initiative
Funds: helmets to government and non-government agencies conducting bicycle safety events for underprivileged
children.
Since 2007, the Bicycle Helmet Initiative has helped equipped thousands of children with a helmet – a simple
and essential means of reducing bicyclist injuries and fatalities. Funded by the proceeds from North Carolina's
"Share the Road" specialty license plate, the program distributes helmets to government and non-government agencies conducting bicycle safety events for underprivileged children. To promote helmet usage and support local bicycle activities, the selection process encourages applicants to partner with community groups to extend bicycle safety awareness outreach.
https://www.ncdot.gov/initiatives-policies/safety/bicycle-helmets/Pages/default.aspx
NCDHHS Community Health Grant
Funds: grants for assuring access to primary and preventive care to meet the health needs of our state’s most vulnerable populations.
Eligible organizations that provide direct primary and preventive care may also use these funds to support
activities including health promotion. Applicants may request up to a maximum of $150,000 for 12 months of funding.
https://www.ncdhhs.gov/about/grant-opportunities/rural-health-grant-opportunities
Federal Sources
In November 2021, Congress passed the $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) which now governs federal transportation policy and funding through 2026 and replaces the FAST Act. The following
section describes pedestrian and bicycle funding opportunities available through existing programs (some with Funding Sources Page 8 of 20
new eligibility and details) and new programs of the IIJA. At the time of the publication of this resource,
Congress and the White House are releasing details on eligibility and for certain programs, and in some cases, there is not yet any detail on eligibility under the IIJA.
Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP)
Funds: Pedestrian and bicycle facilities, streetscaping projects
The Transportation Alternative Program (TAP) projects are federally-funded community-based projects,
disbursed on a reimbursement basis. Under IIJA, funding increased by 60%.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/transportation_alternatives/guidance/ta_guidance_2022.pdf
Active Transportation Infrastructure Investment Program *NEW*
Funds: “Active transportation” networks (within communities) and spine (between communities) projects. Discretionary program to fund the building of active transportation networks.
https://www.railstotrails.org/policy/trailstransform/active-transportation-infrastructure-investment-program/
Healthy Streets Program *NEW*
Funds: streetscape improvements to reduce the urban heat island effect.
Program to address urban heat island effect, lack of tree cover and flooding in low-income communities and communities of color.
Safe Streets and Roads for All *NEW*
Funds: Vision Zero Plans and implementation projects.
Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) discretionary program will provide $5-6 billion in grants over the next 5 years. Funding supports regional, local, and Tribal initiatives through grants to prevent roadway deaths and serious injuries. The SS4A program supports Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg’s National Roadway Safety Strategy and a goal of zero deaths and serious injuries on our nation’s roadways. • • •
Develop or update a Comprehensive Safety Action Plan.
Conduct planning, design, and development activities in support of an Action Plan. Carry out projects and strategies identified in an Action Plan.
Who is Eligible: • • • •
Metropolitan planning organizations
Counties, cities, towns, other special districts that are subdivisions of a State, and transit agencies
Federally recognized Tribal governments
Multijurisdictional groups comprised of the above entities.
https://www.transportation.gov/grants/ss4a/nofo
Funding Sources Page 9 of 20
Promoting Resilient Operations for Transformative, Efficient, and Cost-saving Transportation (PROTECT) *NEW*
Funds: Extreme weather resilience and emergency response infrastructure.
Provide evacuation and recovery mobility to all road users. Build biking, walking, and rolling infrastructure into all resiliency plans and evacuation routes.
Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) Funds: projects to build or repair transportation systems nationally.
This grant opportunity funds road, rail, transit and port projects that promise to achieve national objectives.
Previously known as BUILD or TIGER Discretionary Grants, Congress has dedicated nearly $9.9 billion to fund 700 projects that have a significant local or regional impact. https://www.transportation.gov/RAISEgrants
Recreation Trails Program (RTP)
Funds: Recreational trails and trailhead facilities that are open to the public.
In North Carolina, the Division of Parks and Recreation, part of the North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources, administers the Recreation Trails Program under the approval of the Federal Highway
Administration. The goal of the program is to help states provide and maintain recreational trails for both
motorized and nonmotorized recreational trail use. A 25% local match is required for funding, and funding is provided on a reimbursement basis. The minimum grant amount for on-the-ground trail projects is $10,000 with a maximum of $100,000. Effective with the FAST Act, RTP funding flows through the TAP program. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/recreational_trails/
https://trails.nc.gov/trail-grants/apply-
grant?utm_content=bufferd64e3&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)
Funds: Safety projects for bike and pedestrian infrastructure, educational programs and evaluation programs.
The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a core Federal-aid program with the purpose to achieve a
significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads, including non-State-owned
roads and roads on tribal land. The HSIP received major updates in the IIJA along with a 24% increase in
funding. The updated HSIP is based on four pillars: VRU Safety Assessment, Safe Systems Approach, VRU Special Rule and FHWA Research. https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/
Safe Routes to School (SRTS)
Funds: Active transportation and complete streets projects, plus education or enforcement activities that allow students to walk, bike, and roll to school safely.
Funding Sources Page 10 of 20
The BIL codifies SRTS into the current law, increased funding by 60%, and expands programming to high
schools. Other updates under the IIJA include SRTS infrastructure becoming an eligible use of HSIP and funds may be used for staffing of local coordinators.
https://www.transportation.gov/mission/health/Safe-Routes-to-School-Programs
IIJA Planning Provisions *NEW*
Two new planning provisions benefit bicycle and pedestrian funding:
1. Increasing Safe and Accessible Transportation Options: this requires states and MPO to use 2.5% of planning funds for Complete Streets plans, policies, or transportation plans for bicycling and walking
2. Transportation Access Pilot Program: requires US DOT to provide accessibility data to eligible entities (states, MPOs and local governments) that help measure access across all modes to everyday
destinations. The goal of this program is for states, MPOs and others to use the data in planning to improve accessibility across all demographics and transportation modes.
Bridge Formula Program *NEW*
Funds: bicycle and pedestrian access on bridges unless cost prohibitive Ensures that every bridge repaired under this program includes active transportation infrastructure, not just to check a box, but to connect to adjacent active transportation networks.
Strengthening Mobility and Revolutionizing Transportation (SMART) Grants *NEW*
Funds: supplemental funding grants to rural, midsized, and large communities to conduct demonstration projects focused on advanced smart city or community technologies and systems in a variety of communities to improve transportation efficiency and safety. In general, a Strengthening Mobility and Revolutionizing Transportation grant may be used to carry out a project that demonstrates at least one of the following: • • • • • • • •
Coordinate Automation Connected Vehicles Intelligent, sensor-based infrastructure Systems integration Commerce delivery and logistics Leveraging use of innovative aviation technology Smart grid Smart technology traffic signals.
Funding Amount Available: $500 million total 2022-2026 Unfortunately, many of these did not have a minimum/maximum grant amount and that info will be available when there is an official NOFO.
Funding Sources Page 11 of 20
Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program *NEW*
Funds: planning and construction funding to redress historic inequities and build the future of transportation infrastructure.
The goal of this program is to reconnect neighborhoods cut off by historic investments, ensure new projects increase opportunity, advance racial equity / environmental justice, and promote affordable access. https://www.transportation.gov/grants/reconnecting-communities
Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) Funds: Credit assistance for qualified projects of regional and national significance.
This funding opportunity is typically utilized for very large, multi-million dollar projects.
https://www.transportation.gov/buildamerica/financing/tifia
Federal Transit Administration Metropolitan & Statewide Planning and Nonmetropolitan Transportation Planning - 5303, 5304, 5305 Funds: multimodal transportation planning in metropolitan areas and states.
Funds are available for planning activities that (A) support the economic vitality of the metropolitan area, especially by enabling global competitiveness, productivity, and efficiency; (B) increase the safety of the
transportation system for motorized and nonmotorized users; (C) increase the security of the transportation system for motorized and nonmotorized users; (D) increase the accessibility and mobility of people and for
freight; (E) protect and enhance the environment, promote energy conservation, improve the quality of life, and promote consistency between transportation improvements and State and local planned growth and economic development patterns; (F) enhance the integration and connectivity of the transportation system, across and between modes, for people and freight; (G) promote efficient system management and operation; and (H) emphasize the preservation of the existing transportation system.
Various other FTA grant programs are available to help cities, towns and rural areas invest in bicycle
infrastructure, which improves personal mobility and helps more people access public transportation.
Note: at the time of publication of this resource, there were no new details about this funding program under the IIJA.
https://www.transit.dot.gov/funding/grants/metropolitan-statewide-planning-and-nonmetropolitantransportation-planning-5303-5304
Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBGP)
Funds: Recreational trails projects, pedestrian and bicycle projects, and the Safe Routes to School Program.
The STBG promotes flexibility in state and local transportation decisions and provides flexible funding to best address state and local transportation needs. The STBG provides flexible funding that may be used by states and localities for projects to preserve and improve the conditions and performance on any Federal-aid
highway, bridge and tunnel projects on any public road, pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, and transit
capital projects. These funds are apportioned directly to the MPO’s with over 200,000 in population. French
Broad River MPO manages these funds. Under the IIJA, Transportation Alternatives is now 10 percent of the Funding Sources Page 12 of 20
Surface Transportation Block Grant rather than a fixed dollar amount, so it will grow in proportion to other surface transportation spending
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/specialfunding/stp/
National Highway Performance Program (NHPP)
Funds: Bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure associated with the National Highway System.
The purpose of the National Highway Performance Program (NHPP) are to provide support and funding for the condition and performance of the National Highway System (NHS). Among other eligible activities, the NHPP funds “bicycle transportation and pedestrian walkways” in association with an NHS facility.
Note: at the time of publication of this resource, there were no new details about this funding program under the IIJA.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/fastact/factsheets/nhppfs.cfm
Statewide and Nonmetropolitan Planning Funds: Various transportation planning activities
Funding for this program comes from a 2 percent set-aside for planning and research activities from each
State’s apportionments of five core programs: National Highway Performance Program, Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBG), Highway Safety Improvement Program, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality
Improvement Program, and National Highway Freight Program. Statewide surface transportation planning is
also an eligible activity for additional funding under STBG. The Federal share for statewide planning carried out with State Planning and Research funds is generally 80 percent. However, the Secretary may increase this
Federal share (up to 100 percent) if s/he determines that this would best serve the interests of the Federal-aid Highway Program. Specific funding is provided for: •
The development and integrated management and operation of transportation systems and facilities that enable an intermodal transportation system, including pedestrian and bicycle facilities, intercity buses and bus facilities, and commuter vanpool providers
•
Projects, strategies, and services that will improve transportation system resiliency and reliability; reduce (or mitigate) the stormwater impacts of surface transportation; and enhance travel and tourism
• • •
Participation by interested parties in the planning process Performance based approach
Long-range plan considerations of existing transportation system
Note: at the time of publication of this resource, there were no new details about this funding program under the IIJA.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/fastact/factsheets/statewideplanningfs.cfm
Section 402 State and Community Highway Safety Grant Program Funds: Pedestrian and bicycle safety programs.
The Section 402 program provides grants to states to improve driver behavior and reduce deaths and injuries
from motor vehicle-related crashes. The program is jointly administered by the National Highway Traffic Safety Funding Sources Page 13 of 20
Administration (NHTSA) and the FHWA at the federal level and by the State Highway Safety Offices (SHSO) at
the state level. In order to be eligible, states are required to have a highway safety program that is approved by the Secretary, and they must submit an annual Highway Safety Plan (HSP) which must be data-driven and set
quantifiable, annual performance targets for 15 performance measures. The plan must include strategies that
will allow the state to meet its performance targets and must describe its successes in meeting its performance targets in the previous fiscal year. In North Carolina, the SHSO is located within the Governor’s Highway Safety Program.
Note: at the time of publication of this resource, there were no new details about this funding program under the IIJA.
https://www.ghsa.org/about/federal-grant-programs/402
Section 405 National Priority Safety Programs
Funds: training law enforcement on state laws applicable to pedestrian and bicycle safety; enforcement
mobilizations and campaigns designed to enforce those state laws, or, public education and awareness programs designed to inform motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists of those state laws.
Section 405 provides grant funding to address selected national priorities for reducing highway deaths and injuries. Each program is authorized as a separate section or tier within Section 405, and each has its own
eligibility criteria. States must satisfy the eligibility criteria of each tier in order to receive funding for that tier. Specifically, section 405(h) provides funding to support nonmotorized users. States are eligible if the annual
combined pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities in the state exceed 15 percent of the total annual crash fatalities in the State using the most recently available final data from NHTSA’s FARS. Eligible states may use grant funds only for training law enforcement on state laws applicable to pedestrian and bicycle safety; enforcement mobilizations and campaigns designed to enforce those state laws, or, public education and awareness programs designed to inform motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists of those state laws.
According to NHTSA’s FY 2017 Section 405 Grant Determination results, North Carolina is eligible for 405(h) funds and funding was awarded.
Note: at the time of publication of this resource, there were no new details about this funding program under the IIJA.
https://www.ghsa.org/about/federal-grant-programs/405
Office of Federal Lands Highway (FLH)
Funds: transportation planning and projects for public roads on Federal and Indian lands.
The Office of Federal Lands Highway (FLH), of the US Department of Transportation (USDOT), FHWA, was
established to promote effective, efficient, and reliable administration for a coordinated program of federal public roads and bridges; to protect and enhance our Nation's natural resources; and to provide needed
transportation access for Native Americans. The agency serves to provide financial resources and transportation engineering assistance for public roads that service the transportation needs of Federal and Indian lands.
Funding Sources Page 14 of 20
Within the FLH Office, there are several Programs such as the Federal Lands Transportation Program and the
Tribal Transportation Program, which administer funding for various eligible transportation activities, such as planning and projects. Bicycle and pedestrian projects may be eligible under these specific programs.
Note: at the time of publication of this resource, there were no new details about this funding program under the IIJA.
https://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/
EPA’s Greening America’s Communities Grants Funds: technical assistance and support
A team of designers visits each community to produce schematic designs and illustrations intended to catalyze or complement a larger planning process for the pilot neighborhood. Additionally, these pilots are often the testing ground for citywide actions, such as changes to local codes and ordinances to better support
environmentally sustainable growth and green infrastructure. The design team and EPA, along with partners
from other federal agencies, also help city staff develop specific implementation strategies. The reports from these projects offer detailed ideas for communities that are looking for environmentally friendly ways to
revitalize neighborhoods, spur economic development, offer transportation options, improve public health, and protect natural resources.
https://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/greening-americas-communities
Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance Program (National Park Service) Funds: Facilitation and planning expertise
The National Park Service (NPS) provides free, on-location facilitation and planning expertise to selected communities. They help define project vision and goals; inventory resources; identify issues and opportunities; engage the community; develop concepts for trails, greenways, and parks; set priorities; and identify funding sources. https://www.nps.gov/orgs/rtca/index.htm
Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF)
Funds: acquisition or development of land for public outdoor recreational use purposes.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources administers these funds. This is a 50-50 match program that is disbursed on a reimbursement basis. LWCF creates an outdoor recreation legacy by
requiring perpetual park management. Grant funding cannot exceed $250,000 and are awarded every other year to county governments, incorporated municipalities, public authorities and federally recognized Indian tribes.
https://www.lwcfcoalition.com/
https://www.ncparks.gov/more-about-us/grants/lwcf-grants
Funding Sources Page 15 of 20
Private and Non-Profit Funding Sources Blue Ridge Bicycle Club
Funds: grant matches, events, programs, campaigns
The mission of the Blue Ridge Bicycle Club is to promote healthy and fun lifestyles through cycling in Western North Carolina. They are a strong community partner of bicycling and walking projects and programs. https://brbcnc.clubexpress.com/content.aspx?page_id=22&club_id=285841&module_id=145699
Connect Buncombe
Funds: campaigns and programs
Connect Buncombe is an all-volunteer, nonprofit organization supporting the growth of greenways in
Buncombe County. Through advocacy, awareness campaigns, volunteer events, strategic partnerships, and
direct funding, Connect Buncombe works to ensure Buncombe County meets its greenway-related goals as
outlined in the county’s Comprehensive Plan. Connect Buncombe has funded parts of the Close the GAP plan and may be a future funding partner. https://connectbuncombe.org/
MountainTrue
Funds: community planning and policy activities
MountainTrue fosters and empowers residents throughout the region to engage in community planning, policy and project advocacy, and on-the-ground projects. They may be a partner as Asheville considers advancing projects and policies.
https://mountaintrue.org/
Southern Appalachian Highlands Conservancy Funds: programs to connect people and nature
SAHC conserves unique plant and animal habitat, clean water, farmland, scenic beauty, and places for people to
enjoy outdoor recreation in the mountains of Tennessee and North Carolina. They may be a partner as Asheville seeks ways to expand greenways and natural surface trails. https://appalachian.org/
RiverLink
Funds: planning efforts
RiverLink promotes the environmental and economic vitality of the French Broad River and its watershed. They have funded, and continue to fund, several projects that expand greenway and planning throughout the Asheville area. They are a strong community partner. https://riverlink.org/
Funding Sources Page 16 of 20
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) Grants and Grant Programs
Funds: among other activities, planning and demonstration projects, community engagement, and public education
The RWJF grant programs have three objectives: to discover and explore bold ideas with transformational
potential; to spread model interventions that have a meaningful impact on health; and to conduct research and evaluation. Types of projects they fund include, but are not limited to: • • • • • • • •
Planning and demonstration projects Research and evaluations
Policy and statistical analysis
Learning networks and communities
Public education and strategic communications
Community engagement and coalition-building Training and fellowship programs Technical assistance
The foundation typically issues a competitive call for proposals which defines the challenges, activities to
achieve desired outcomes, and eligibility criteria. They also provide funding through open calls for ideas and different types of challenges and prize competitions, as well as direct solicitations for projects in support of specific programmatic objectives.
https://www.rwjf.org/en/how-we-work/grants-and-grant-programs.html
Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina Foundation Grants Funds: programs related to health
BCBSNC Foundation funds organizations that improve the health and well-being of all North Carolinians in
communities big and small throughout the state. Their grants are a commitment by the foundation to invest in organizations for an established period of time to further the work of organizations, collaborations, and
communities across the state. They do not have a traditional grant cycle, but rather announce opportunities to
apply for grant funding on a periodic basis. Available grants range from small-dollar grants to larger, multi-year partnerships. They fund initiatives that align with their values, which include: • • • • •
Transforming the health care system (including oral health) Expanding access to healthy food
Supporting a healthy start for children
Improving the places where people live
Strengthening the ability of communities to improve their own health
http://www.bcbsncfoundation.org/
Funding Sources Page 17 of 20
Duke Energy Foundation Funds: programs and projects supporting conservation and access
The Duke Energy Foundation is committed to making strategic investments to build powerful communities
where nature and wildlife thrive, students can excel and a talented workforce drives economic prosperity for all. They fund projects in strategic areas, including programs supporting conservation and access. https://www.duke-energy.com/community/duke-energy-foundation
America Walks Community Change Grants
Funds: programs and projects supporting physical activity and active communities
This grant program will work to provide support to the growing network of advocates, organizations, and
agencies using innovative, engaging, and inclusive programs and projects to create change at the community level. This program will award grantees $1,500 in community stipends for projects related to creating healthy, active, and engaged places to live, work, and play. Funded projects should: • • • •
Increase physical activity and active transportation in a specific community
Work to engage people and organizations new to the efforts of walking and walkability Demonstrate a culture of inclusive health
Create and support healthy, active, and engaged communities
https://americawalks.org/community-change-grants/
National Safety Council Safe System Innovation Grants
Funds: projects supporting programs, research and infrastructure to achieve vision zero goals
The Road to Zero (RTZ) initiative launched in 2016 by the National Safety Council, Federal Highway
Administration, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration with the goal of eliminating roadway deaths within 30 years. In 2017, the Centers for Disease Control became a partner to RTZ, which now has about 900 coalition members. The U.S. Department of Transportation
committed $1 million a year for three years and an additional $500,000 in Year 2 to fund Safe System
Innovation Grants; NSC is distributing these grants. It is unclear whether funding will continue into 2020 but this source should be kept in mind as bicycle and pedestrian projects align well with vision zero. https://www.nsc.org/road-safety/get-involved/road-to-zero/grants
Safe Streets, Smarts Cities Academy
Funds: technical support to implement demonstration projects
Smart Growth America has hosted two rounds of their Safe Streets, Smart Cities Academy. In the second round, three cities were selected to test out strategies that improve safety for all people who use the street. The cities work with technical experts and with each other over the course 10 months to implement demonstration
projects that use proven safety countermeasures, tactical urbanism, and emerging technologies to slow down traffic and create safer streets. Currently the Academy is not advertising for a third round, however this opportunity should be flagged for future possible technical assistance and support.
https://smartgrowthamerica.org/announcing-the-winners-of-the-safe-streets-smart-cities-academy/ Funding Sources Page 18 of 20
Dogwood Health Trust Immediate Opportunities and Needs Grant Funds: projects that match one of the Trust’s strategic priorities (housing, education, economic opportunity, health and wellness)
The Dogwood Health trust has a variety of grant programs to fund projects and programs that meet one of the Trust’s strategic priorities. . The City of Asheville should strengthen relationships with the Trust and remain in conversation about the connection between health and active transportation to build support for active transportation infrastructure funding. https://dogwoodhealthtrust.org/
AARP Community Challenge
Funds: "quick-action" projects that can help communities become more livable for people of all ages. The AARP Community Challenge provides small grants to fund "quick-action" projects that can help
communities become more livable for people of all ages. Applications are accepted for projects to improve housing, transportation, public space, technology ("smart cities"), civic engagement and more. AARP Community Challenge grants can be used to support the following types of projects: • • •
Permanent physical improvements in the community
Temporary demonstrations that lead to long-term change New, innovative programming or services
https://www.aarp.org/livable-communities/community-challenge/info-2020/2020-challenge.html?cmp=EMC-
DSM-NLC-LC-HOMFAM-20200205_LivableCommunities_899300_1269402-020520-F1-2020Challenge-HeaderCTRL-4345770&encparam=rbaRU%2fFp9QyjQZ6aWwZy7Jli%2flHM4KkTzwsGWLjbM80%3d
Safe Routes to Parks Activating Communities Program
Funds: action plans to increase safe and equitable access to parks and greenspaces
The Safe Routes to Parks Activating Communities program provides tailored technical assistance, along with a $12,500 award for seven nonprofit organizations to develop and initiate action plans to increase safe and
equitable access to parks and green space in their communities. Developed through a collaboration between Safe Routes Partnership and the National Recreation and Parks Association in 2017, the Safe Routes to Parks Action Framework provides a structured process for communities to approach this work. The grantee
communities will work closely with Safe Routes Partnership staff to proactively engage community members in the process of assessing park access, putting together an action plan to address barriers, and begin implementing that plan.
https://www.saferoutespartnership.org/healthy-communities/saferoutestoparks/2021-application
Other Community Grant Opportunities/Partners: •
Five Star and Urban Waters Restoration Grant Program: https://www.nfwf.org/programs/five-star-and-
urban-waters-restoration-grant-program?activeTab=tab-2 Funding Sources Page 19 of 20
•
Rails to Trails Doppelt Family Trail Development Fund: https://www.railstotrails.org/our-
work/grants/doppelt/ • •
NFWF Acres for America: https://www.nfwf.org/programs/acres-america/acres-america-places-visit The Trust for Public Land: https://www.tpl.org/
Funding Sources Page 20 of 20
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
CLOSE THE GAP APPENDIX 12: UDO AND ASSDM REVIEW
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
CLOSE THE GAP APPENDIX 12.A: UDO REVIEW
Close the GAP – Detailed UDO (Unified Development Ordinance) Review CHAPTER/PA RT Part I – Charter and Related Laws
ARTICLE / DIVISION Subpart A, Article II.
SECTION Sec. 9.
RECOMMENDATION Open Meetings Recommendations: Add language about reasonable accommodations. Develop citizen-oriented language and website information about how to request reasonable accommodations for open meetings and city events. Place in an easy to find location on the City’s website.
Chapter 1 – General Provisions
Sec. 1-2
Develop and implement an accessibility checklist for meeting locations and for meeting advertisements. Definitions to Update Gender – Update with inclusive language to remove the word “neuter” (see definitions in Chapter 10 – Nuisances, Sec. 10-2. – Non-discrimination ordinance.)
RELATED INFORMATION UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTICHRELA_SPACH_ARTIITHCO_S9MEBEOPOPCIBEH E Related City Links: https://www.ashevillenc.gov/accessibility/ Example of Accessibility Guidance with Location Checklist: Accessible Meeting and Event Checklist | Accessibility Information (cornell.edu) UDO Reference https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH1GEPR_S1-2DERUCO
Right-of-way – Improve the overall definition Sidewalk – Improve the overall definition
Chapter 2 Administrati on
Article III. – Boards, Commissions and Committees Article III., Division 3. AND Division 13.
Roadway – include “bicyclists and pedestrians” Article III Establishes boards, commissions, and committees of the City. While there are no specific recommendations for city commissions, there are opportunities for Close the GAP goals to be integrated with work of the committees. Sec. 2-77. – Sec. 2-79. Sec. 2185.20. – Sec. 2185.22.
Asheville Downtown Commission (ADC) The ADC and the Design Review Committee play a significant role in promoting downtown walkability. The ADC and the Review Committee should be updated on Close the GAP goals and policies, particularly as it relates to walkability in the downtown environment. (See also: Chapter 7., Article III., Sec. 7-3-8) Asheville Area Riverfront Redevelopment Commission (AARRC)
Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 1 of 24
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH2AD_ARTIIIBOCOCO
UDO Reference: ADC: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH2AD_ARTIIIBOCOCO_DIV3ASDOCO AARRC: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH2AD_ARTIIIBOCOCO_DIV13ASARRIREC O
CHAPTER/PA RT
ARTICLE / DIVISION
SECTION
RECOMMENDATION
RELATED INFORMATION
The AARRC is like the ADC but with a scope that is limited to the defined riverfront area. (See also: Chapter 7., Article III., Sec. 7-3-10 and Sec. 7-3-11) The AARRC should be updated on Close the GAP goals and policies, particularly as it relates to walkability in the downtown environment. Article III., Division 7.
Sec. 2-156. – Sec. 2-164.
AND
Sec. 2-185.1. – Sec. 2185.10
Division 11.
Urban Forestry Commission (UFC) Trees, both branches and roots, can impede pedestrian access routes. The UFC is tasked with preserving the City’s tree canopy. At times, the need to provide clear pedestrian access routes and tree preservation can be in conflict. Best practice indicates that maintenance and trimming of trees should be on a regular schedule to prevent the lower limbs from becoming protruding objects - this should be part of a policy and a part of the UFC’s tree selection. Additionally, tree grates or other surface level elements need to meet the surface requirements in PROWAG. (Chapter R3, R302.7 Surfaces).
UFC UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH2AD_ARTIIIBOCOCO_DIV7ASTRCO Public Art Link UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH2AD_ARTIIIBOCOCO_DIV11PUARCUCO PROWAG Standards: https://www.access-board.gov/prowag/
The UFC should be updated on Close the GAP goals and policies, particularly as it related to maintaining pedestrian access routes. Public Art and Cultural Commission Like the UFC, members of the Public Art and Cultural Commission should be made aware of clear pedestrian access routes should be considered when placing public art. Article III., Division 9.
Sec. 2-171. – Sec. 2-172.
Multimodal Transportation Commission The MMTC advises the city on multimodal policies, integration of multimodal transportation planning, and other topics related to multimodal transportation. The MMCT should have close involvement with Close the GAP implementation. Recommendation: The MMTC should be updated on Close the GAP goals and policies and should be tasked with monitoring implementation.
Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 2 of 24
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH2AD_ARTIIIBOCOCO_DIV9MUTRCO
CHAPTER/PA RT
ARTICLE / DIVISION
SECTION
RECOMMENDATION
RELATED INFORMATION
It is important that this Commission understand and buy into the importance of the Transition Plan so they can use it for consideration in project prioritization. Chapter 3. Animals
There are no specific recommendations for this chapter. It is worth noting, however, that Chapter 3 provides the enforcement foundation for animals to be leashed on sidewalks and other public ways (Article II. Sec. 3-27. (1) and requires animal waste disposal in public spaces (Article I. Sec. 3-11.).
Chapter 4.5 Cable Services & Telecommun ications
Article I. – Article III.
Also of note is an exception for service animals, which do not have to be under physical restraint while if the dog is under the owner’s direct control (Article II. Sec. 3-27. (1). The City grants authority to the franchisee to construct facilities in the public right of way (PROW). There are many references and requirements related to how franchisees should interface with PROW. Recommendations: • Ensure that those approving plans and granting permits are equipped to evaluate ADA barriers and improvements. Ensure that all approved plans do not result in conditions that adversely affect the city’s ADA Transition Plan.
Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 3 of 24
•
When franchise agreements are renegotiated and renewed, use as an opportunity to improve conditions and/or add improve ability to move items that currently impede into the PROW.
•
Article II. Sec. 4.5-48 (f) states that the franchisee shall replace and restore paving in as good as condition, or better than, before said work commenced. Strengthen this requirement to say, “must be in compliance with current city standards to the extent practicable.” This will ensure that non-compliant facilities are upgraded and ADA compliant. Use Technical Infeasibility Forms to document “to the extent practicable.”
•
Add language to expressly require a temporary traffic control
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH3AN
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH4.5CASETE
CHAPTER/PA RT
ARTICLE / DIVISION
SECTION
RECOMMENDATION plan (TTC) that follows the City’s TTC policy when a pedestrian access route will be blocked during any type of utility work. Chapter 6 contains provisions related to Public Street and Sidewalk Closures (Sec. 6.2. (a) 104.13.1), Road and Public Way Obstructions (Sec. 6.2. (a) 105.6.7), Traffic Calming Devices (Sec. 6.2. (b) 503.4.2)
Chapter 6. – Fire Prevention and Protection
RELATED INFORMATION
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH6FIPRPR
Recommendation: While there are no specific recommendations for Chapter 6, it is important to continue to involve the City of Asheville’s Fire Department in PROW decisions and project development. Chapter 7 is an important chapter when it comes to Close the GAP goals.
Chapter 7. Developmen t Article II. – Official Map, Rules of Construction , and Definitions
Sec. 7-2-5. Definitions
Definition Recommendations: Certificate of Compliance: Consider adding sidewalk / curb ramp compliance to the list. Greenway: Existing definition is park focused and does not meet the definition of a public right of way. As a park, the accessibility requirements follow the 2010 ADA standards and not PROWAG. Consider revising to include a public way / multimodal transportation focus. Historic Structure / Historic Landmark: It is important to note that historic properties are not exempt from the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements to the greatest extent possible, historic buildings must be as accessible as non-historic buildings. Open Space: Include a provision for greenways that are public pathways and/or multimodal transportation-oriented features (align with the revised greenway definition). Public Street: Should be updated to encompass the city’s complete streets policy and/or multimodal transportation (currently only references “public standards for vehicular traffic”)
Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 4 of 24
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH7DE_ARTIIOFMARUCODE PROWAG, Alterations: https://www.access-board.gov/ada/#ada202_3 National Park Service, Making Historic Properties Accessible: https://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/briefs/32accessibility.htm
CHAPTER/PA RT
ARTICLE / DIVISION
SECTION
RECOMMENDATION
RELATED INFORMATION
Steet right-of-way, Right-of-Way and Public right-of way: Improve overall definitions pertaining right-of-way to include greenways, multiuse path, and other public way / multimodal transportation options. Add a definition for public right-of-way. Add definitions for: multimodal transportation, public right-ofway, multi-use sidepath, pedestrian, mobility, pedestrian access, bicycle, accessible, bike lane, curb ramp In general, there are terms that mean something in one context, but have a different meaning in another. For example, Alteration in a historic preservation context has a different definition compared to PROWAG. As the City updates the UDO, other terms or phrases to consider based on context include: • “Maximum extent practicable” is used in flood control definitions and PROWAG / public way definitions. • Alteration: This definition applies to historic structures. PROWAG includes an “Alterations” definition and standards. As the city incorporates more PROWAG language, these definitions may conflict. • Modification in the UDO refers to wireless telecommunication facilities. Modification can also apply to changes to an intersection. Article III. – Decision Making, Administrati ve, and Advisory Bodies
Sec. 7-3-2 – Sec. 7-4-3
The City’s Planning and Zoning Commission, Board of Adjustment, and Historic Resources Commission all have an advisory or quasijudicial role in land use decisions. Recommendations • Educate all commissions on Close the GAP and the role it has in promoting quality walkability and ADA accessibility across the city. • Add Close the GAP to the list of plans referenced in consistency statements for Planning and Zoning Commission decisions (like the Comprehensive Plan).
UDO Reference: Planning and Zoning Commission https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH7DE_ARTIIIDEKIADADBO_S7-32ASPLZOCO Board of Adjustment https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH7DE_ARTIIIDEKIADADBO_S7-3-3BOAD Historic Resources Commission https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina
Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 5 of 24
CHAPTER/PA RT
ARTICLE / DIVISION
SECTION
RECOMMENDATION
RELATED INFORMATION nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH7DE_ARTIIIDEKIADADBO_S7-34HIRECO
Sec. 7-3-5.
Technical Review Committee The city’s Technical Review Committee (TRC) plays a very important role in land use decisions.
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH7DE_ARTIIIDEKIADADBO_S7-35TERECO
Recommendations • Formalize bike/ped/greenway staff membership (go beyond standard review) • Appoint one person responsible for ADA compliance review • Explore ways ADA/Ped/Greenway issues can be better addressed at the TRC level. For example, are there any specific standards that the TRC needs to address in a better way? Article V. – Developmen t Review Procedures
Sec. 7-5-3.
Sec. 7-5-8 – Subdivision Plat Approvals
Temporary Use Permits – For events defined as a public interest event (more than 100 people expected), permit applicants must submit a public safety plan, as described in subsection three. Temporary traffic control for pedestrians is not explicitly noted as one of the items to address in the safety plan. However, the way subsection three is written, it appears that the City can request additional information. (Sec. 7-5-3., (c), (3), b.)
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH7DE_ARTVDEREPR_S7-5-3TEUSPE
Recommendation: Using the Close the GAP Pedestrian Accommodations in Work Zones: Requirements and Checklist (Appendix 15) as a guide, explicitly list temporary traffic control plans for pedestrians in temporary use permit language and in the temporary use application form. Sec.7-5-8., (a). Major Subdivision, (6) – Acceptance of Rights-ofway and easements.
City of Asheville Special Event Guide: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Vh4mh8qJu1tyibq4rgfryEjFVignP L01/view
The city can accept rights-of-way by council action. Recommendation: • Review/refine the process to ensure that what is accepted is ADA compliant so that the City is not accepting non-compliant facilities.
Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 6 of 24
Temporary Use Application Form: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lG6NvWMNDW99rWjKi_05vmJ_l ABzUX70/view
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH7DE_ARTVDEREPR_S7-5-8SUPLAP
CHAPTER/PA RT
ARTICLE / DIVISION
SECTION
RECOMMENDATION •
Sec. 7-5-10 – Design Review
RELATED INFORMATION
Consider adding greenways to the list, even though it cannot be required.
The purpose of the design review procedure is to, “encourage new construction and the renovation and rehabilitation of existing structures in a manner that will promote visual harmony, enhance the historical integrity, and develop creative design solutions.” Recommendation: • Achieving ADA compliance in an historic or heavily developed area is challenging (and these areas are often not accessible). Recommend adding “improve access for people with disabilities and multimodal transportation access (or meet walkability goals)” to the design review committee’s purpose and add standards to assess accessibility and multimodal transportation access as an opportunity to push for improvements. • Consider training to increase ADA technical understanding of Design Review Committees. (May require staffing resources)
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH7DE_ARTVDEREPR_S7-5-10DERE City’s Design Review Page: https://www.ashevillenc.gov/department/city-clerk/boards-andcommissions/design-review-committee/ Design Review Areas: https://avl.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=7 eff733763294e8a9ac02647ed29a5c8 Downtown Design Review Guidelines: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kk3IE_pQxnBD3hW8hCppA3le362qr-j/view Downtown Checklist: https://drive.google.com/file/d/13Ck5hZ3Qs5JU0FVSx3eGXEFWpf 0YyBC9/view River District Design Guidelines: https://drive.google.com/file/d/14nMgAelX1eLLnZsv54xKgmAPvx O3OWgK/view River District Checklist: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qiHf83FmEO1SAAWus7VVyMPPd2n97XethAhLsZ6Bf8/edit
Article VIII – General Use Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 7 of 24
Sec. 7-5-17. Driveway Access Permits Sec. 7-8-1. Enumeration
Refer to ASSDM (Asheville Standard Specifications and Details Manual) review.
The City of Asheville has zoning districts, overlay districts, and expansion districts. Districts have differing levels of pedestrian
Hotel Design Guidelines: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1d3FI_579w6AYGNj21asaVBDszWYkhZ_/view UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH7DE_ARTVDEREPR_S7-5-17DRACPE UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina
CHAPTER/PA RT
ARTICLE / DIVISION and Expansion Districts
SECTION and description of districts; designation of districts on official zoning maps.
RECOMMENDATION and/or multimodal transportation requirements. In general, most zoning districts are required to meet the 7-11-8 Sidewalk Standards, and some have additional standards that apply. The full standards in some districts are designed to create walkable environments and other districts, while not designed to create walkable districts, consider the needs of pedestrians. UDO Review Table 1 outlines pedestrian / sidewalk requirements by district. Recommendations: When the City updates the UDO, consider the following recommendations:
Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 8 of 24
•
Review overall sidewalk requirements and standards and update as needed to meet the pedestrian / walkability intent of each district.
•
Strengthen access management standards / cross parcel access in all commercial and mixed use, and districts that promote pedestrian walkability.
•
Consider adding guidelines/policy to insure minimum clear with desired for pedestrian access route. PROWAG is minimum 4 feet, but more is desired. (This is especially applicable to districts where benches, outdoor dining, etc. are desirable)
•
In the form-based districts (Haywood, River Arts, Urban Place), it is not clear that the front stoop requirements only apply to residential uses. Consider a statement that requires commercial and multifamily uses to have a ramp or level grading and pedestrian access. (ADA Title III). AND Similar concerns about access to building entrances. Technically these are site arrival accessible routes (2010 ADA Standards), but sidewalks need to be built in coordination.
RELATED INFORMATION nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH7DE_ARTVIIIGEUSEXDI
CHAPTER/PA RT
ARTICLE / DIVISION Article XI. Developmen t and Design Standards
SECTION
RECOMMENDATION
RELATED INFORMATION
Sec. 7-11-1. General
New development projects, and redevelopment projects under certain conditions, are required to meet Article XI. – Development and Design Standards. Both new and redevelopment projects present opportunities for the City to add to its
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH7DE_ARTXIDEDEST_S7-11-1GE
Sec. 7-11-2. – Parking, loading, and access standards.
Recommendations: Sec. 7-11-2. (b)(3) Handicapped parking spaces.
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH7DE_ARTXIDEDEST_S7-11-2PALOACST
Update the van parking requirements from 1 in 8 accessible spaces to 1 in 6 per the 2010 ADA Standards: 208.2.4 – Van Parking Spaces. Existing 1 in 8 lots can remain until the lots are altered. Consider adding a note about the requirement for notes about pedestrian access routes 206.2.1 – Site Arrival Points which states, “206.2.1 Site Arrival Points. At least one accessible route shall be provided within the site from accessible parking spaces and accessible passenger loading zones; public streets and sidewalks; and public transportation stops to the accessible building or facility entrance they serve.”
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Standards: Combined ADA Standards.book (access-board.gov)
PROWAG R214: On-Street Parking Spaces https://www.access-board.gov/prowag/chapter-r2-scopingrequirements/#r214-on-street-parking-spaces PROWAG R309 On -Street Parking Spaces https://www.access-board.gov/prowag/chapter-r3-technicalrequirements/#r309-on-street-parking-spaces
Sec. 7-11-2. (e) Shared and remote parking. When remote parking is referenced throughout the UDO (such as in this section and in the form-based districts), consider adding standards to ensure that sidewalks or other accessible pathways link remote parking areas to destinations. Sec. 7-11-2. (f) Off Street Parking Requirements. PROWAG Standard R214 provides a list of accessible parking spaces required along a block perimeter. Consider adding a note as a reminder to recalculate the number of accessible spaces required based on the number of marked or metered parking spaces on the block perimeter (see PROWAG R214, MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices) 3B.19). Sec. 7-11-3. – Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 9 of 24
Recommendation: Consider adding a requirement that newly planted trees must not
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina
CHAPTER/PA RT
ARTICLE / DIVISION
SECTION
RECOMMENDATION
RELATED INFORMATION
Landscaping and Buffering Standards
protrude into the pedestrian circulation path more than 4" between 27" and 80" above the walking surface and will be maintained and trimmed to prevent protrusion.
nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH7DE_ARTXIDEDEST_S7-11-3LABUST
Sec. 7-11-4. – Open Space Standards
The open space requirements present an opportunity to increase the City’s sidewalk and greenway supply. In general, the following count toward open space requirements: • Sidewalks that are above the minimum required • Streetscapes and hardscaped areas • Greenways
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH7DE_ARTXIDEDEST_S7-11-4OPSPST
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Standards: Combined ADA Standards.book (access-board.gov)
Sec. 7-11-4. (c) Open space requirements contain greenway as open space language which states, “regardless of the requirements and exemptions of this subsection, any portion of the site of the proposed development that is designated as future open space or greenway in the greenway master plan of the City of Asheville shall be reserved for open space. This area may be counted toward the total amount of open space required for the development.” Recommendation: This, and the ensuing paragraphs, should be reviewed by the city’s legal department and updated accordingly. It is important to develop a set of ordinance tools that allow the City to identify and accept open space that may be a link in the City’s greenway network. Sec. 7-11-6. Traffic Impact Analysis
As currently written, TIAs should evaluate pedestrian access and circulation (Sec. 7-11-6. Traffic Impact Analysis (b) Traffic Impact, (3) Area Conditions, c. Site Accessibility, 4. Pedestrian Access and Circulation) Recommendation: Consider adding pedestrian (and bicycle) level of service standards.
Sec. 7-11-8. Sidewalk Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 10 of 24
Recommendations:
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH7DE_ARTXIDEDEST_S7-11-6TRIMAN Pedestrian Level of Service, Concord, NC https://apps.concordnc.gov/legacy/planningweb/CDO/Rewrite/TI A%20Ordinance%20Portion.pdf https://apps.concordnc.gov/legacy/planningweb/CDO/TSM/Articl e%208%20-%20Traffic%20Impact%20Analysis.pdf UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina
CHAPTER/PA RT
ARTICLE / DIVISION
SECTION Standards
RECOMMENDATION (a) Purpose. Update, “…development and use of property are done in accordance with an adopted City of Asheville (herein "city"), transportation or corridor plan, including but not limited to such plans as the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), greenway, neighborhood, small area, and pedestrian thoroughfare plans” to reflect recent plans OR change language to “in accordance with all plans adopted by the City of Asheville.” (b) Guidelines for requiring sidewalks: All new single-family developments with 20 or more units. Recommendation: Evaluate the willingness to lower this threshold or change standards for certain areas - context vs number of units. All new multi-family developments greater than 10 units All new office, institutional, commercial, and industrial development All existing office, institutional, commercial, and industrial development additions/expansions that result in an increase of more than 75% value of the structure. Recommendation: Lower threshold to gain more sidewalk facilities. Consider context and GAP Priority Corridors. All new streets, improved streets or extension to streets. Recommendation: An “improved street” is not clearly defined in the UDO or ASSDM. Clarity with a definition and/or standards. “New development" shall be interpreted to include all new construction in addition to the use of a building or property where the use has ceased for a period of more than 180 days (c) Additional conditions: o Needed pedestrian linkage from adopted plan o Current / projected (within five years) traffic count >300 vpd Language: “In the event that the sidewalk is not required, the developer must provide a recorded easement, if necessary, for the future development of
Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 11 of 24
RELATED INFORMATION nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH7DE_ARTXIDEDEST_S7-11-8SIRE Easement Language from Greensboro, NC Where sidewalks are not required to be provided, the developer shall provide a graded area without obstructions, located adjacent to the right-of-way and sufficient to allow for future sidewalk construction meeting city standards. This graded area will be kept free from landscaping (shrubs, trees. fences, walls, etc.) including landscaping that would otherwise be required by ordinance. A sidewalk easement will be conveyed to the city where required due to insufficient right-of-way.
CHAPTER/PA RT
ARTICLE / DIVISION
SECTION
RECOMMENDATION
RELATED INFORMATION
the sidewalk. The developer wherever practical shall grade for the future development of a sidewalk.” • • • •
Define “wherever practical” Require documentation Strengthen recorded easement language (see Greensboro example). Whenever sidewalks are mentioned, also mention driveways.
(d) Sidewalks should be constructed along public and Private streets according to 7-11-8(c). (e) Fee in Lieu Recommendation: Update when staff is done with updating Fee in Lieu language.
7-11-10 – Outdoor Lighting
Article XIII. – Sign Regulations
Article XIV. – Accessory and Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 12 of 24
7-13.1. – Sign Regulations
7-14-2 – Temporary Use
Other Recommendation: Add a requirement that driveways should be built to specifications that will accommodate future ADA compliant sidewalk connections. (b) Outdoor lighting - Definitions - Right-of-way. Recommendation: This is a different definition of right-of-way used elsewhere in the UDO. Develop a consistent definition for ROW throughout the UDO and ASSDM. Recommendation: Review this section, and the sign regulations in the form-based districts, to ensure that signage standards do not conflict with the 2010 ADA Standards and PROWAG. Particular attention should be paid to allowable protrusions into the pedestrian access route (PAR) with respect to height and width as well as cane detectability. See PROWAG.
Recommendation: If temporary parking is provided, accessible parking must be provided - Temporary accessible routes need to be provided in
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH7DE_ARTXIDEDEST_S7-11-10OULIST
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH7DE_ARTXIIISIRE PROWAG R21: Protruding Objects https://www.access-board.gov/prowag/chapter-r2-scopingrequirements/#r210-protruding-objects
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH7DE_ARTXIVACTEUSST_S7-14-2TEUSST
CHAPTER/PA RT
ARTICLE / DIVISION Temporary Use Structures Article XVI. Uses By Right, Subject to Special Requirement s and Conditional Uses
SECTION
RECOMMENDATION
Structures
accordance with the 2010 ADA Standards throughout this section.
7-16-1 – Uses by right, subject to special requirement s
(c) Uses by right, subject to special requirements standards, (44) Mobile food vending, and (69) Sustainable development projects contain additional sidewalk and/or greenway standards. (69) (i): Sidewalk or greenways shall provide connections from the new construction to the existing community on all frontages where the subject property abuts a public right-of-way. In situations where a parcel does not directly abut a public right-of-way, a sidewalk or greenway connection shall be provided along private easements or rights-of-way. Projects with 50 units or more shall provide a minimum of two pedestrian/bike access points.
RELATED INFORMATION
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH7DE_ARTXVIUSRISUSPRECOUS_S7-161USRISUSPRE
Recommendation: Add a clause allowing the City’s traffic engineer to allow for a change in location of the greenway. Chapter 10 – Nuisances
Article IV. Noise Regulation
Chapter 15 – Solid Waste Managemen t
Sec. 10-86. – Exceptions
Recommendation: Add “audible pedestrian signals” to item (6)
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH10NU_ARTIVNORE_S10-86EX
Sec. 15-5. Maintenance of sidewalks, alleys and rights-of-way
Establishes that property owners/occupants shall maintain the sidewalk, grass strip, alley, etc.
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH15SOWAMA
Recommendations: • Increased enforcement efforts. •
Sec. 15-38. – Requirement s for certain types of waste material.
Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 13 of 24
Define that “clear and safe” means a minimum 4 ft width, no protruding objects, and a firm stable and slip resistant surface? (b) Establishes, “refuse receptacles shall be set out to curbside only on the day of collection”. More about collection is included in Sec. 15-44. Recommendation: Increased enforcement efforts and occasional community education information to share that trash cans should be placed
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH15SOWAMA_ARTIISTCO_S1538RECETYWAMA
CHAPTER/PA RT
ARTICLE / DIVISION
SECTION
Sec. 15-39. – Location and collection.
Sec. 15-45. Collection and hauling procedures. AND Sec. 1546. Post collection procedures.
Chapter 16 – Streets, Sidewalks and Other Public Spaces
Article I. In General.
Sec 16.1. – Obstruction and deposit of debris.
Sec 16.3. Keeping sidewalks, grass strips, drainage swales and gutters clear, clean and unobstructe d. Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 14 of 24
RECOMMENDATION on and removed from the street on trash pickup day to minimize interference with people using the public ROW. (2) Public sidewalks. Refuse… contained in approved refuse receptacles may be placed on the sidewalk on the day of collection, so long as it does not unreasonably interfere with pedestrian traffic. Establishes the conditions under which trash cans should be placed and removed from approved pick up locations. Out to pick up location by 7:00 AM and removed from pick up location by 11:00 PM on scheduled trash pickup day.
RELATED INFORMATION
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH15SOWAMA_ARTIISTCO_S15-39LOCO
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH15SOWAMA_ARTIISTCO_S1545COHAPR
Note: same conditions apply for recycling containers, per Article III. Recycling. Recommendation: Increased enforcement efforts and occasional community education information to share that trash cans should be placed on and removed from the street on trash pickup day to minimize interference with people using the public ROW. Establishes the conditions for which obstructing sidewalks with debris is defined and enforced. Recommendation: This section should be modified to include additional references to bikeways, bike lanes, curb ramps and other bicycle and pedestrian amenities
Establishes that it is the property’s owner/occupant responsibility to maintain sidewalks, grass strips, swales, etc. Property owners / occupants shall: Clear sidewalks of any hazard to the public Clear sidewalks of vegetation Maintain grass strips “…remove such ice from the sidewalk on or before 10:00 a.m. each day in which the temperature exceeds 40 degrees Fahrenheit.” Recommendation: clarify this requirement for easier interpretation.
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH16STSIOTPUPL_ARTIINGE_S161OBDEDE Shared Mobility: Revise this section as the City adopts shared mobility options such as bike share and scooters. UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH16STSIOTPUPL_ARTIINGE_S163KESIGRSTDRSWGUCLCLUN
CHAPTER/PA RT
ARTICLE / DIVISION
SECTION
RECOMMENDATION -
RELATED INFORMATION
“…remove snow, hail, sleet and other similar accumulation from such within 48 hours after the snow, hail, sleet or other similar accumulation ceases to fall.”
NOTE: In many cases, the city is the ROW owner, so it is also the City’s responsibility to keep sidewalks and other areas clear and maintained. Recommendation: • Increase education and enforcement efforts. Sec. 16.7 – Gates and Door Openings
Recommendation: Also add reference to PROWAG standards.
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH16STSIOTPUPL_ARTIINGE_S167GADOOPSTSI
Sec. 16-9. Railing or fence required for certain lots bordering street or sidewalk.
Areas that are 18 inches above or below any street, alley or sidewalk need a secure railing or fence high enough to keep people from falling.
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH16STSIOTPUPL_ARTIINGE_S169RAFERECELOBOSTSI
Recommendations: • NOTE: In many cases, the city is the ROW owner, so it is also the City’s responsibility to keep sidewalks and other areas clear and maintained. •
Article III. – Public Rightof-Way Cuts
Sec. 16-36. Permit required.
Add reminder to inspection checklists
No person shall cut into any street, sidewalk, etc. without obtaining a cut permit. -
Must obtain a permit Greater requirements for cuts lasting more than 10 working days Responsibility of permitee to provide traffic control per MUTCD
Recommendation: This section should be modified to include additional references to bikeways, bike lanes, curb ramps and other bicycle and pedestrian amenities Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 15 of 24
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH16STSIOTPUPL_ARTIIPURI-WCU_S1636PERE
CHAPTER/PA RT
ARTICLE / DIVISION
SECTION
Sec. 16 – 38. Restoration Costs
RECOMMENDATION Require use of Close the GAP’s Pedestrian Accommodations in Work Zones Design Guidance and Checklist (Accompanying Document) with driveway cut permits. Provides conditions related to how the cut must be restored. The engineering department is responsible for inspections, including final inspections. Recommendations: •
Review interpretation of DOJ/DOT requirements for partial resurfacing - when it requires a curb ramp to be built.
•
Consider adding language about how cuts should be handled in bike lanes or greenways; consider referencing NACTO (National Association of City Transportation Officials) maintenance guidance.
RELATED INFORMATION
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH16STSIOTPUPL_ARTIIPURI-WCU_S1638RECO DOJ/DOT Requirements: https://www.ada.gov/doj-fhwata.htm#:~:text=Because%20resurfacing%20of%20streets%20const itutes%20an%20alteration%20under,Yerusalim%2C%209%20F%20 3d%201067%20%283rd%20Cir.%201993%29. NCDOT Memo in Response to DOJ/DOT Requirements: ADA Curb Ramps for Resurfacing and Division Design Projects.pdf (ncdot.gov) NACTO Language Reg: “If trenching is to be done in the bicycle lane, the entire bicycle lane should be trenched so that there is not an uneven surface or longitudinal joints.”
Article III. Encroachme nts
Chapter 19 – Traffic
Article I – In General
Recommendations: •
Sec. 19-13. – Accident Reports
Sec. 19-16. – E-scooters
Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 16 of 24
Add a requirement to Sec. 16-74. b (4) and Section 1676. b (4) that requires all encroachments to meet ADA Standards and PROWAG for Pedestrian Access Routes (PAR). Recommendation: In general, update to reflect all types of roadway users: vehicles, pedestrians, people on bikes, micro-mobility etc. For section (b): Update to reflect modern reporting requirements. This section prohibits the use of e-scooters operators and prohibits the use of an e-scooter to be used on any City public
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH16STSIOTPUPL_ARTIIPURI-WCU_S1640APPR
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH19TR_ARTIINGE_S19-13ACRE
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina
CHAPTER/PA RT
ARTICLE / DIVISION
SECTION and escooter share programs.
Article III. – Traffic Control Devices
Sec. 19-82. Obedience to devices.
Sec. 19-84. Vehicle control signs and signals.
Sec. 19-85. Pedestrians subject to signals.
RECOMMENDATION rights-of-way.
RELATED INFORMATION nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH19TR_ARTIINGE_S19-16OOOOSHPR
Recommendation: Clarify if the language was intended to prohibit individual escooter owners from using the devices on City public rights-ofway. Consider allowing e-scooters. Recommendations: Consider adding language that pedestrians may request accessible pedestrian signals and the traffic engineer will review requests for accessible pedestrian signals (APS). Implement PROWAG aligned checklist in accordance with Chapter 6 of NCHRP Web-Only Document 117B: Accessible Pedestrian Signals: A Guide to Best Practices (Link: Accessible Pedestrian Signals: Chapter 6: Designing APS Installations (apsguide.org)) Reiterates yielding to pedestrians and other vehicles. Recommendation: (b)(4) Flashing yellow light - yield to vehicles or peds in, or approaching, the intersection. − Add information for flashing beacons, such as rectangular rapid flash beacons. − Add information for hybrid pedestrian beacons. Recommendation Upgrade language to require adequate closure of crossings in the event a crossing is unsafe for pedestrians and a curb ramp will not be provided. Note that, if crossing is not desired, pedestrians should be blocked using a sign and approved detectable barrier to avoid discrimination* against individuals with disabilities.
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH19TR_ARTIIITRCODE_S19-82OBDE
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH19TR_ARTIIITRCODE_S19-84VECOSISI
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH19TR_ARTIIITRCODE_S19-85PESUSI
*A lack of a curb ramp does not mean pedestrians cannot cross, just that pedestrians who need curb ramps can't cross and such, should be closed for all individuals, regardless of ability.
Article IV. Speed Regulations Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 17 of 24
Sec. 19-111. – Reasonable Speed; speed
City speed limits, generally: − 20 mph business district − 35 mph in any residential district
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH19TR_ARTIVSPRE_S19-
CHAPTER/PA RT
ARTICLE / DIVISION
SECTION limit in business and residential districts.
Article V. – Stopping, Standing and Parking Chapter 20 – Trees
Article I – General.
Sec. 19-137. – Parking prohibitions at certain locations. Sec. 20.5. – Administrati on
Sec. 20-24. Trees and shrubbery abutting city property to be kept trimmed, responsibility of owner. Appendix A – Sign Regulations Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 18 of 24
RECOMMENDATION
RELATED INFORMATION 111RESPSPLIBUREDI
Recommendations: Revisit speed limits and safety for pedestrians. Consider a 20mph citywide speed limit unless otherwise noted. Or consider defining different districts (update to match modern zoning districts) Recommendation: 19-137 (a)(2) On a crosswalk - change to on a marked or unmarked crosswalk (b) The engineering director shall have prepared a document entitled, Asheville Standards Specification and Detail Manual, which shall contain the guidelines and specifications for tree planting, care, maintenance, removal and landscape design which shall be adopted by city council and used by developers, landscape architects, designers and the public in furtherance of the requirements and intent of this chapter. The guidelines shall be reviewed at a minimum, every two years, by the parks and recreation director, engineering director, public works director, and the commission. Major revisions to the guidelines shall be approached by city council.…. Recommendations: − “Guidelines to be reviewed every two years” – This is in the Trees section and not elsewhere in the UDO. Consider adding a policy statement in the ASSDM. Recommendation: − Consider adding PROWAG Clear Zone dimensions to quantify free and safe passage.
Recommendation: − Consider adding PROWAG Clear Zone dimensions to quantify free and safe passage.
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH19TR_ARTVSTSTPA_DIV1GE_S19137PAPRCELO UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH20TR_ARTIGE_S20-5AD
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=PTIICOOR_CH20TR_ARTIICIPR_S2024TRSHABPRBEKETRREOW
UDO Reference: https://library.municode.com/nc/asheville/codes/code_of_ordina nces?nodeId=APXASIRE
UDO Review Table 1: Sidewalk / Pedestrian Environment Requirements Section
District
7-8-2
RS-2 Residential Single-Family LowDensity District RS-4 Residential Single-Family Medium Density District RS-8 Residential Single-Family HighDensity District RM-6 Residential Multi-Family Low Density District RM-8 Residential Multi-Family Medium Density District RM-16 Residential Multi-Family High Density District
7-8-3 7-8-4 7-8-5 7-8-6 7-8-7
7-8-8
Neighborhood Business District
7-8-9 7-8-10 7-8-11 7-8-12
Office District Office II District Office/Business District Community Business I District
7-8-13
Community Business District II Urban Residential District
Pedestrian Focus in District Intent
“Located near employment centers, shopping facilities, roads and other urban infrastructure capable of handling the demand generated by high density residential development” “Accessible to pedestrians from the Surrounding residential neighborhood”
“Should be sensitive to a significant pedestrian population” “Should be sensitive to a significant pedestrian population” “Should be sensitive to a significant pedestrian population”
Sidewalk Standards 7-11-8 Standards
None
Recreational/Open Space Standards 7-11-3 Standards
7-11-8 Standards
None
7-11-3 Standards
7-11-8 Standards
None
7-11-4 Standards
7-11-8 Standards
None
7-11-4 Standards
7-11-8 Standards
None
7-11-4 Standards
7-11-8 Standards
None
7-11-4 Standards
7-11-8 Standards
None
7-11-4 Standards
7-11-8 Standards 7-11-8 Standards 7-11-8 Standards 7-11-8 Standards
None None None None
7-11-4 Standards 7-11-4 Standards 7-11-4 Standards 7-11-4 Standards
7-11-8 Standards
None
7-11-4 Standards
7-11-8 Standards
None
7-11-4 Standards
None See Access Standard Summary (1) See Access Standard Summary (2) See Access Standard Summary (2)
7-11-4 Standards 7-11-4 Standards
7-11-8 Standards
See Access Standard Summary (3)
None
7-11-8 Standards
None
7-11-4 Standards
7-8-14 7-8-15
Resort District Institutional District
7-11-8 Standards 7-11-8 Standards
7-8-16
Highway Business District
7-11-8 Standards
7-8-17
Regional Business District
7-8-18
Central Business District
7-8-19
River District
Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 19 of 24
“Pedestrian connections between the businesses within the district enhance the functionality of the district” “A well-balanced transportation system for this district must recognize the importance of all forms of movements, be it pedestrian, bicycling, transit, automobile, or truck in nature.” “The development of a pedestrian trail/greenway along the rivers is encouraged within the River District.
7-11-8 Standards
Access Standards
7-11-4 Standards 7-11-4 Standards
Section
District
Pedestrian Focus in District Intent
Sidewalk Standards
Access Standards
Recreational/Open Space Standards
Landowners are encouraged to dedicate/grant dry land right-of-way or easement within the river resource yard. The public pedestrian trail/greenway along the rivers would be a part of the proposed greenway system for the City of Asheville as designated in the Greenway Master Plan.” 7-8-20
Commercial Industrial District
7-11-8 Standards
7-8-21 7-8-22 7-8-23
Light Industrial District Industrial District Urban Village District
7-11-8 Standards 7-11-8 Standards District Specific Standards: Pedestrian Zone = 15 ft, Secondary Streets = 12 ft w/ engineer approval Sidewalk minimum 7 ft (clear and maintained) Bulb-outs required at intersections and crossings Requires sidewalk on one side on access streets Requires sidewalks on two sides on internal streets Greenways may substitute sidewalks in residential areas
Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 20 of 24
“Create mixed use development that is economically vital, pedestrian-oriented and contributes to the place-making character of the built environment”
See Access Standard Summary (3) None None District Specific Standards
7-11-4 Standards 7-11-4 Standards None District Specific Standards
Section
District
Pedestrian Focus in District Intent
7-8-24
Neighborhood Corridor District
“Foster medium density, mixed-use development that is economically viable, pedestrian oriented and contributing to the place making character of the built environment”
7-8-25
Urban Residential District
7-8-26
Urban Place Form District
“While housing types that are economically viable and pedestrian oriented will be emphasized, a mix of other compatible activities, especially those that support residential uses within walking distance, will be permitted. It is also intended that this district enhance and maintain transportation connectivity through the promotion of multi-use greenway paths, sidewalks, and public transit.” “Improve connectivity with an emphasis on walkability, accessibility and transit supportive connections”
Sidewalk Standards Low density residential areas (< 8 units / acre) = 5 ft sidewalk 7-11-8 Standards + Additional Standards; no additional width standards
Access Standards
Recreational/Open Space Standards
Includes Access and Connectivity Standards to address cross parcel access and, and pedestrian safety and mobility.
7-11-4 Standards + Additional square footage standards.
7-11-8 Standards + Additional Standards; no additional width standards
Includes Access and Connectivity Standards to address cross parcel access and, and pedestrian safety and mobility.
7-11-4 Standards + Additional square footage standards.
Form Based District
Form Based District
Form Based District
City Engineer Review
None
Primary Street 10’ with curbside parking 18’ w/o parking Side Street 6’ sidewalk with 8’ planting strip OR 10’ sidewalks with tree grates 7-8-27
Airport District
Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 21 of 24
None
Section
District
Pedestrian Focus in District Intent
7-8-28
Haywood Road Form District
“Make the corridor more walkable and pedestrian-friendly; Implement the complete streets model by enhancing multimodal transportation options, including transit, bicycle and pedestrian connections; Calm traffic and improve vehicular circulation”
7-8-29
River Arts Form District
“Improve connections and mobility while balancing walking, biking and vehicular options”
Sidewalk Standards Form Based District Core 8’ minimum; 8’ parking lane/bump out HR-2 10’ minimum; 8’ parking lane/bump out HR-3 8’ minimum; 8’ parking lane/bump out HR-4 & HR-7 6’ minimum HR-5 6’ minimum, 5’ planting area HR-6 8’ minimum, 5’ planting area Form Based District RAD-RES 6’ pedestrian walkway; 6’ tree lawn planting strip RAD-LYH 6’ pedestrian walkway; 6’ tree lawn/grates planting strip RAD-NT
Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 22 of 24
Form Based District
Recreational/Open Space Standards Form Based District
Form Based District
Form Based District
Access Standards
Section
District
Pedestrian Focus in District Intent
7-8-40
Central Business Expansion District
“Facilitate the multimodal circulation patterns and access needs of the sizable pedestrian population”
7-8-41
Commercial Expansion District
Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 23 of 24
Sidewalk Standards Primary Street: 8’ Side Street: 6’ 6’ tree lawn/grates planting strip RAD-SHP Primary Street: 8’ Side Street: 6’ 6’ tree lawn/grates planting strip RAD-RIV Primary Street: 8’ Side Street: 6’ 6’ tree lawn/grates planting strip RAD-IND 6’ pedestrian walkway; 6’ tree lawn/grates planting strip RAD-OPS 6’ pedestrian walkway; 6’ tree lawn/grates planting strip
Access Standards
Recreational/Open Space Standards
No additional standards
No additional standards
No additional standards
7-11-8 Standards + Additional Standards
District Specific Standards
7-11-14 Standards
Section
District
7-8-42
Residential Expansion District
Pedestrian Focus in District Intent
Sidewalk Standards 7-11-8 Standards + Additional Standards
Access Standards District Specific Standards
Recreational/Open Space Standards 7-11-14 Standards + Additional Standards
Access Standard Summary (1) Primary access to colleges, universities, junior colleges, vocational schools, hospitals, and medical complexes shall not be from local residential streets. If located on a local residential street, primary access to other non-residential uses in the Institutional District shall be no more than 500 feet from the local street's intersection with a street with a minimum classification of collector. (2) Points of access to the street shall be determined by the city traffic engineer following revie w of the site plan and other relevant information. (3) Vehicular entrances shall be a maximum of 24 feet in width. In addition, driveway curb cuts are limited to a single standard driveway per 200 feet along a block face per development. Automobile access and services from a rear alley is encouraged.
Appendix 14: UDO Review Page 24 of 24
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
CLOSE THE GAP APPENDIX 12.B: ASSDM REVIEW
Asheville Standard Specifications and Design Manual (ASSDM) Review May 23, 2022 Version As a part of the Asheville Close the GAP Project, the City’s ASSDM were reviewed with relation to pedestrian, greenway, and ADA matters. The following are notes and recommendations as future updates to the ASSDM are considered.
Section 1 - General Requirements and Provisions Section 1A.03 (page 1-1) Refers to the Complete Streets Policy. This document should be hyperlinked or the location of the document should be referenced.
Section 1A.04 (page 1-1) Refers to many standards. Consider including 2010 ADA Standards.
Section 1A.05 (page 1-1) Reconcile terms used in the UDO with terms used in the ASSDM.
Section 1A.09 (page 1-3) Consider adding “and other adopted plans” to this sentence: “However, the design of the improvements also depends on the land use, zoning and comprehensive planning requirements for the City, as well as the specific site geography of the land to be improved or developed.”
Section 1A.11a Alterations, Modifications and Waivers (of standards) (page 1-3) There is no specific technically infeasible documentation process for ADA exceptions work is needed in this section. Consider two processes: technical infeasibility form and updating design requirements to target design criteria below “maximum” to all for construction variance.
Appendix 14: ASSDM Review Page 1of 11
Section 1A.13 Violations (page 1-4) Consider adding a requirement for removing and replacing elements not in compliance with the Manual at the contractor’s expense (this item may be handled through a standard detail note requirement and may require legal review).
Section 1B.03a Maintenance of Traffic (page 1-5) Refers to MUTCD for alternate routes for pedestrians, but it should be expanded/updated for more current guidance on TTC and should include bicycle and trail schematics. For more details, reference the Close the Gap Accompanying Documents: Pedestrian Accommodations in Work Zones Design Guidance and Checklist.
Section 1B.03c Installation and Maintenance (page 1-6) Consider adding greenways to this sentence, “Existing public streets and sidewalks shall be kept open to traffic at all times by the Contractor unless permission to close the street, or portions thereof, is granted by the City Engineer or his/her designee…” Consider adding a requirement for public notice of closures and include notice for closure of sidewalks and biking facilities.
Section 3 - Transportation Design Standards Section 3B.01 Steet Types Defined (page 3-1) Align ASSDM definitions with UDO definitions.
Section 3C-01 Composition (page 3-3) Change bicycle lanes to on-street bicycle facilities.
Section 3C-03 Horizontal Alignment (page 3-3) Consider adding alignment requirements for bike and shared use facilities (this would likely be in a separate greenway section)
3C.04 Vertical Alignment (page 3-3) This should cross-reference section 3H.05c, or should refer to the ADA guidelines. Consider adding grade requirements for bike and shared use facilities. Grades at crosswalks at stop controlled intersections have 2.0% max grade. Also consider adding to Table 3-3.
Figure 3-3 (page 3-6) Consider revising to indicate DWS plates oriented perpendicular to the crosswalks, per preferred design so that it is parallel to the crosswalk.
3C.07 Sight Visibility Triangles at Intersections (page 3-7) Consider expanding this section to address stopping sight distance from AASHTO as well as pedestrian sight lines at driveways with uncontrolled crosswalks.
Section 3C.11 (page 3-10) Consider adding an additional note to indicate that curb extensions can be provided with bicycle lanes when applying protected intersection design principles.
Section 3C.12a Median Widths (page 3-10) Consider adding a note to allow medians less than 6 feet. If less than 6 feet and located at a pedestrian crossing, the crosswalk will not have detectable warnings and if signals are present, signal timing will allow pedestrians to cross the full width of the road in one cycle (left turn medians may need to be cut short so they do not extend into the crosswalk).
Section 3E.02 Pavement Design (page 3-12) This section refers to pavement design for streets, but not trails and greenways. A section on greenway surface design is recommended and should be cross-referenced in this section.
Section 3E.05 Pavement Materials - Curbs, Gutters, Driveways, and Sidewalks (page 3-13) This is a good location to recognize alternative sidewalk surfaces, per Close the GAP Appendix 16. Need to include requirements for brick and concrete pavers - vertical edges and no bevels to provide a smooth, rollable surface.
Figure 3-9: Handicapped Parking Space Dimensions (page 3-14) Consider the following: - On street parking requirements / figures per PROWAG Section R309. - Change “Handicapped Parking” to “Accessible Parking”. - Provide information on accessible parking sign - including language that only the International Symbol of Accessibility will be used. - Provide information for striping access aisle, etc: Accessible parking must be located on the shortest accessible route to accessible entrances and a recommendation that van accessible spaces be placed in the farthest space when accessible spaces are grouped. - Add a specific Standard Detail to show dimensions, signing and striping for on-street and off-street parking.
Table 3-13: Channelized Automobile Storage Length (page 3-15) This does not require channelized automobile storage lengths to exclude pedestrian zones. Consider adding a note that vehicles may not overhang pedestrian access route, or provide minimum width. Provide parking blocks as needed.
Section 3G.02 Definition of a Driveway (page 3-16) Need to more clearly address ADA access for driveway aprons. Consider adding a statement that all driveways crossing a sidewalk, or future sidewalk should give priority to maximizing pedestrian access.
Section 3H Multimodal Design Standards - Sidewalks -
Revise sections to more fully integrate PROWAG guidance for PAR. See Close the Gap Appendix 15 for table of requirements. Consider adding requirements for ramps, stairways and handrails. Also upgrade pedestrian railing language and details to match ADA and PROWAG guidance,
including instances where they may be required to achieve curb ramp designs that are accessible to the maximum extent feasible.
Section 3H.02a Sidewalks on Both Sides of a New Street (page 3-17) -
This leaves out many local streets, which are only required to be 22 ft. min (See Table 3-1); consider ensuring that is the intent. Consider including the same statement regarding utility poles as in 3H.02b. Revisit both sections to ensure that this is the level of sidewalk installation desired today.
Section 3H.02b Sidewalks on One Side of a New Street (page 3-18) This seems to be lacking in enforcement language. Consider adding an exception process with documentation/guidance on priorities when making concessions.
Section 3H.03b Renovated sidewalks (page 3-18) Consider changing “crossing ramps” to “curb ramps”.
Section 3H.04 Sidewalk Fee-in-Lieu of Construction (page 3-18) Update this section to reflect the most recent fee-in-lieu policy.
Tables 3-18 and 3-19 (page 3-19) Review and revise this section to account for Close the Gap priority corridor recommendations in addition to land use context. Consider revising sidewalk widths as “minimums” or “desirable” widths, rather than absolute values.
Section 3H.05a Obstacles in Sidewalk (page 3-19) -
Consider expanding on PAR requirements. Consider expanding vertical obstruction details. Consider including the infeasibility documentation process.
Section 3H.05c Vertical Grade (page 3-19) Consider expanding vertical grade guidance.
Section 3H.05d Cross Slope (page 3-19) Consider changing maximum cross slope - and vertical grades - to reflect best practice and include construction tolerance in design - cross slope 1.5% max., grade 4.5% or road grade.
Section 3H.05f ADA Ramps (page 3-20) -
-
-
Consider expanding this section, i.e. there should be a clear definition of PAR. Upgrade pedestrian curb ramp details. See best practice examples here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1jMBWPsh4niLyVi8gdArfXY4G33tOj-rm?usp =sharing Develop and reference ADA design checklists, technical infeasibility form and design manuals. Similar best practices are available here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1fdT-RBpTFxZlavP8HlszThtU_tptplIV?usp=s haringConsider addressing design exceptions and steep cross slopes at cross streets that exceed 5%. Consider using “Curb ramps”, not “ADA ramps”. If no PAR exists on the other end of a crosswalk, a curb ramp is not required - no curb ramps to nowhere unless there is a plan for future sidewalk connection.
Section 3H.05h Materials, Thickness, Joints, and Finish (page 3-20) -
-
Consider including in the details: requirement for min 6 in. concrete thickness on all corner curb ramps where it is possible for trucks to track over the ramp when turning the corner. Consider revising “Materials not meeting ADA requirements…” to “Materials not meeting accessibility surface requirements...”
Section 3H.05k Sidewalk Drop-off (page 3-20) Consider a slope of 1.5% (best practice) to allow for construction tolerances.
Section 3H.05m Tree Planting (page 3-20) -
Consider language to place tree grates outside of PAR, where feasible to avoid future issues with accessibility as tree grates frequently heave with tree root growth. If a tree grate is located in the PAR, it must meet surface requirements.
-
-
Consider adding vertical clearance requirements so lower branches do not protrude into the pedestrian circulation path. This may require larger trees, or appropriate pruning prior to installation. Consider adding that mature shrubs cannot narrow the clear width of the sidewalk.
Section 3I Traffic Signals (page 3-21) Consider development of Traffic Signal Specifications Manual to address timing, operations, detection methods, battery backup and detailed guidance for bicycle and pedestrian design. Including guidance for best practices to accommodate individuals with hearing and vision impairment. Consider requiring pedestrian signals and push buttons at all intersections, with a required design exception process for approval of locations that do not include pedestrian equipment. - Need to address APS, LPI etc. - Need to reference a design standard for push button placement and audible messages/sounds etc. - Could consider passive detection at RRFB’s and the need for audible messages etc. - Consider PHB requirements. - Discuss how quarter-mile spacing of signals may affect pedestrian and bicycle access.
Section 3J Multimodal Design Standards - Bicycle Facilities (page 3-22) -
Shared use paths and neighborhood greenway standards could be included with this chapter. Consider expanding to include standards or guidance for protected bicycle lanes and cycle tracks. Consider expanding on Table 3-20 and referencing FHWA Bicycle Facility Selection Guide (see separate review of on-street greenway connections). Consider updating typical details and standards when the AASHTO Bike Guide is released. Consider updating Figure 3-19 with Lexington Ave example Consider expanding and updating 3J.02e to include bicycles at signals, bike boxes, detection, clearance times, bicycle signals, two-stage turn queue boxes, etc. Consider adding “Bikes May Use Full Lane” signs for steep roads, bridges, tunnels and narrow roads.
-
Consider adding a statement that bike facilities should minimize conflict with pedestrians.
Section 3K Multimodal Design Standards - Transit Facilities (page 3-30) -
-
-
Consider revising the first statement to: “Transit facilities must consist of an accessible paved boarding and alighting area. A transit stop or station may also include benches, and transit shelters.Transit transfer stations must meet the requirements of the US DOTs 2006 ADA Standards for Transportation Facilities (CFR…)” Consider the use of ”boarding and alighting area” instead of “ADA pads”. Consider adding slope requirements for 5 ft. min. X 8 ft. min.boarding and alighting area: 2% (1.5%) perpendicular to the curb and the same grade as the road parallel to the road. The boarding and alighting area must connect to PAR (sidewalks or streets); should also be located in an area with adequate lighting.
Section 3K.02 Curb-Side Factors (page 3-32) -
A clear space 30 in. x 48 in. min. is required near all benches, trash receptacles, map holders and operable parts. Where shelters are provided, a clear space must be located fully within the shelter. Additional maneuvering space may be required where clear space is confined. See the proposed PROWAG Section R308. Mounting height for map holder is 60 in.; this may not be viewable by a person seated in a wheelchair. Consider lowering to the height required for parking meters - viewable at 3.3 ft. (39.6 in.). Schedules aren’t mentioned, consider adding. Figure 3-31: Consider adding Standard Detail. Where LED/LCD automated signs are provided, provide equivalent audible information. Can be user activated.
3K.03 Permit Requirements (page 3-35) -
Consider expanding standards references for ADA . Consider expanding on the building to sidewalk link and ADA design at building entrances to PAR on public sidewalks.
-
Consider addressing maintenance? Is the City taking on all responsibility?
Section 4 - Site and Street Lighting Standards Section 4A.01 General (page 4-1) Consider clearly stating that street light poles are not to be placed in such a way as to narrow the PAR to less than 4 ft.
Section 4A.01c Priorities for Installation (page 4-1) Consider adding crosswalks and transit stops to prioritization factors.
Table 4-1: Illumination Requirements for Street Lights (page 4-2) Consider referencing LED lighting as the preferred light source.
Section 5 - Utilities Section 5A.01 Utility Layouts (page 5-1) Consider adding Pedestrian Access Route detail in this section.
Section 5E Utility Cuts Within City Maintained Street Rights-of-Way (page 5-6) -
-
Consider adding a statement requiring a temporary route where pedestrian and bicycle travel is disrupted. All barricades and delineators must meet the requirements in Chapter 6 of the MUTCD. Consider adding a note that yellow tape is not a substitute for barriers or delineation. Implement and integrate The Pedestrian Accommodations in Work Zones: Requirements and Checklist (See Close the GAP Appendix 15). Trenching, cutting or repairs adjacent to curb ramps, or involving curb ramps or the pedestrian street crossings, must meet accessibility standards and may require replacement of curb ramps to current Standards.
Section 5E.01b Concrete Utility Cuts (page 5-7) Check bike lane impacts w/ maintenance
Section 5E.04 Right-of-Way Cut Permit (page 5-8) There is an opportunity to add more enforcement for ADA in the review process.
Section 6 - Public Safety Standards Section 6E Fire Hydrants (page 6-5) Consider adding that fire hydrants shall not reduce the clear width of the PAR to less than 4 ft. Also, consider ensuring that water/sprinkler valves protruding from buildings cannot create a protruding object - recess into the building front, or provide a detectable edge beneath the structure.
Section 6J Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) Strategies (page 6-9) This section should consider incorporating the idea that vulnerable users on sidewalks, shared use paths and bike facilities should be given specific attention to provide and increase the user perception of safety.
Section 7 - Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control See Section 7F/7G and Appendix 9D (need something similar for ADA requirements)
Section 8 - Stormwater Section 8B.07 Street Drainage (page 8-3) Great that it mentions inlet upstream of intersections. Add note that no inlets are to be placed in the pedestrian access route or crosswalk. Also, drainage shall be provided to avoid ponding at the bottom of curb ramps and blended transitions.
Section 10 - Standard Details Integrate Comments from Sections 1-9 as well as those recommended in ADA Transition Plan for the Public Rights-of-Way. Example recommendations from above Section 3H. - Upgrade pedestrian curb ramp details. See best practice examples here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1jMBWPsh4niLyVi8gdArfXY4G33tOj-rm?usp =sharing - Develop and reference ADA design checklists, technical infeasibility form and design manuals. Similar best practices are available here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1fdT-RBpTFxZlavP8HlszThtU_tptplIV?usp=s haringConsider addressing design exceptions and steep cross slopes at cross streets that exceed 5%.
STD. NO. 3.01: STANDARD STREET SECTIONS (SUBURBAN COLLECTOR, URBAN COLLECTOR & LOCAL) Add note to all Street Sections for the cross slope of streets. 2%(?) Note: Crosswalk running slope 5% max.
STD. NO. 3.03: STANDARD STREET CROSS SECTIONS SHOWING UTILITY LOCATIONS Consider adding note that placement of utility valves, etc. in the sidewalk should be avoided. If unavoidable, the surface must be flush with the sidewalk and slip resistant.
STD. NO. 3.10A: VALLEY CURB DETAIL This profile will not work in a pedestrian crosswalk area due to slopes.
STD. NO. 3.11: STANDARD CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER Counterslope of gutter at pedestrian street crossing cannot exceed 5% (use 4.5%).
ASHEVILLE UNPAVED GUIDEBOOK
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
TA B L E O F C O N T E N T S A Policy & Plan Framework for Natural Surface Trails in City of Asehville, North Carolina ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 207 Overview ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 207 Vision and Mission of Asheville Unpaved ������������������������������������������������������������ 207
Trail Easements ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 220 Liability ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 220
Sustainable Trail Design Principles ������������ 220 Standard Trail Construction Specifications ������������������������������������������������������������������������� 222 Tree Cutting ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������222
The Asheville Unpaved Vision ����������������������������������������������������207
Brush Removal �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������222
A summary of benefits that will be realized by Asheville Unpaved include: �����������������������������������������������������������207
Tread Construction ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������222
Mission of the Asheville Unpaved Alliance and Plan ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 208
Climbing Turns �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������223
Trail Grades ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������223
Goals of Asheville Unpaved ��������������������������������������������������������� 208
Rolling Crown Switchbacks �����������������������������������������������������������223
A National Context ����������������������������������������������������������� 209
Trail Reroutes and Rehabilitation of Abandoned Trail ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������223
Precedents/Case Studies ���������������������������������������������������������������209
The Plan ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 211 Trail Classes �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 211 The Asheville Unpaved Hubs and Neighborhood Connectors Map ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 211 Natural Surface Trail Typologies ���������������������������������������������� 213 Determining What Typology To Use ������������������������������������� 213 Single Use Trail ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 213 Multi-use Trail ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 213
Use of Natural Materials ������������������������������������������������������������������223 Restrictions ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������223
Proposed Trail Ratings System ������������������������ 224 Next steps for asheville unpaved ������������������ 226 Sustain and Continue to Build the Asheville Unpaved Alliance �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������226 Plan Yearly ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������226 Fund It ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������226
Greenway Connector ��������������������������������������������������������������������������� 213
Grassroots Connection, Advocacy, and Volunteer Development ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������226
Creating and Maintaining Accessible Trails ����������������� 216
Community Engagement �����������������������������������������������������������������226
Federal & State Policy on Accessibility ���������������������������� 216
Trail Design and Construction ����������������������������������������������������226
When to Use Accessible Trail: Decision Tree Flow Chart ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 216
Promote and Activate �������������������������������������������������������������������������227
The Partnership: The Asheville Unpaved Alliance �� 216 Alliance Structure, Roles, and Governance �������������������� 216 Checklist of Questions As Projects Are Submitted to the Annual Work Plan ������������������������������������� 218 The Annual Work Plan ������������������������������������������������������������������������ 218
Maintenance
����������������������������������������������������������������������������219
Contracting Professional Maintenance ������������������������������219 Volunteer Maintenance & Community Support ���������219 Maintenance Agreements ��������������������������������������������������������������219
Measure It ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������227
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
I N D E X O F F IG U R E S , I M AG E S , M A P S & TA B L E S Figures
Maps
Figure 1.. Trail Typologies Decision Tree: Decision Flow Chart ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 215
Map 1. Asheville Unpaved / Proposed Natural Surface Trail: Hubs and Neighborhood Connectors �� 212
Figure 2. When to Use Accessible Trail: Decision Flow Chart. ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������217 Figure 3. What Asheville Unpaved Alliance Members Most Interested in Helping With? ����������������������������������������������� 218 Figure 4. Sustainable Trail Design Principles ���������������� 221
Tables Table 1. Trail Classifications (Hubs & Neighborhood Connectors) ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 211 Table 2. Natural Surface Trail Typologies �������������������������� 214
Images Image 1. Bentonville, Arkansas’ Oz Trails Homepage. ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������209 Image 2. Knoxville’s Urban Wilderness Homepage. �������������������������������������������������������������������������209
Table 3. Standards for Outdoors Developed Areas Guidelines (SODAG) Technical Requirements ����������������� 221 Table 4. Proposed Trail Rating System ���������������������������������224
“
Unpaved greenways give the “forest” experience within the city” - North Asheville Resident
206 /// GAP Plan /
#
ASHEVILLE U N PAV E D GUIDEBOOK A P O LICY & PL A N FR A M E WOR K F O R NAT UR AL S U RFAC E T R A I L S I N C I T Y O F A S H E V I L L E , NO R T H C A RO L IN A OV ERV IE W Asheville Unpaved is the vision and framework that guides the City of Asheville towards an evolutionary change where the community is further connected by natural surface (unpaved) trails that foster immersion into nature, play and connection. It is a vision that allows the community to stay and play, to connect through a community-supported resource, and move further from car-dependence. This vision realizes that natural surface trails can connect neighborhoods to each other and to greenways and recognizes that these trails can become a destination in and of themselves. Nearly half a million mountain bikers visit the nearby Pisgah National Forest (Economic Impact of Mountain Biking in the Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests, Outdoor Alliance, 2017). Many of these visitors hail from urban Asheville, as evidenced by running clubs and Pisgah Area SORBA (a mountain bike club), whose members’ majority reside within the Asheville metro area. The COVID-19 pandemic has emphasized more than ever the need and demand for outdoor recreation.
The Asheville Unpaved guidebook provides a road map for the development of a city-wide system of natural surface trails. The guidebook explores the role of the Asheville Unpaved Alliance, which has grown as an organization-based alliance of partners who will drive Asheville Unpaved as a community-supported and led initiative. This guidebook is also a framework for guiding principles and policies for which Asheville Unpaved can be structured upon. Asheville Unpaved is not a static natural surface trail plan, but a vision and framework open to opportunity and community collaboration.
VI SION AND MI SSION OF ASH E VI L L E U NPAVED The Asheville Unpaved Vision Asheville Unpaved will be a sustainably designed and built natural surface trail system that connects to the city’s active transportation network. Users will be able to access this system via greenways, sidewalks, bike lanes, and trailheads, to have “front door” access to trails. No longer will residents and visitors have to drive 30 minutes to visit world class trails. Spread equitably across the city, trails will be developed in Asheville’s natural lands and parks, campuses, connecting nature, and visitor destinations. Asheville Unpaved trails will be the destination as a one-of-akind experience to hike, run, or ride. The trail system’s greatest feature will be its quick connection to neighborhoods and commerce (bike and coffee shops, restaurants, and breweries).
A summary of benefits that will be realized by Asheville Unpaved include: • Front door trail access: In tandem with a greater build out of Asheville’s multi-modal system, users can go from front door to trail without a vehicle.
/
GAP Plan
/// 207
• More trail miles for less dollars: Natural surface trails can be one of the cheapest public investments for the greatest returns. Trails are 35 times cheaper to build than greenways. They can serve as precursors to greenways being built, or utilize lands where greenways would be too costly to build. • Improved health and wellness: Trails can play a critical role in physical and mental health. They are critical infrastructure for public health. • Increased sense of community and equity: Asheville Unpaved will be community supported. With this comes collaboration, community service, and socialization. This system will provide opportunity for chance encounters, new friendships, and programmed activities. The Asheville Unpaved Plan is a vision plan created and implemented by Alliance Partners that will connect new users to the trails. Users of these trails will include community members who might have less access to the popular trail opportunities on the outskirts of Asheville: such as urban school children who don’t have trail access, those with disabilities that are given adaptive equipment to ride trails, and neighborhoods that are currently unsafe for walking. The Alliance will prioritize opportunities that will advance equity including opportunities to partner with neighborhoods that lack basic walking and biking infrastructure. • The economic benefit: Trails are proven to have a huge return on investment (ROI) with high economic returns compared to the low cost of infrastructure, spurred business growth, and health savings cost. Two case studies of Southern communities that have seen a tremendous ROI from trails can be read about in the National Context section.
Mission of the Asheville Unpaved Alliance and Plan Led by an alliance of partner organizations, Asheville Unpaved is a plan and policy framework to implement a network of natural surface trails, on City-owned or communityowned properties. It is a community and partner-supported collaborative initiative with the City of Asheville to create connectivity and equitable access to alternative transportation and recreational opportunities. The Alliance will collaborate on the planning, construction, stewardship, and activation of use for this network of trails.
Goals of Asheville Unpaved The Asheville Unpaved Alliance envisions the following goals for Asheville Unpaved: • The initiative is a community-driven broad collaboration of partners and funders. The broad coalition of partners are involved to fund, design, and manage the trail system. The partnership structure and roles are clearly defined. • Trails serve as well-utilized transportation and recreation facilities. Trails serve the need of connecting neighborhoods, utilizing public space, and providing immediate access to quality trail experiences without the need of an automobile. • Trails are built for sustainability. Trails built with proven construction techniques make them last longer with less maintenance. These same techniques make them more accessible to a broader population of people of varying abilities. • Projects are equitable. Projects are distributed throughout the community, benefit underserved areas, and are supported by legacy neighborhoods. • Projects meet the greatest need. Priority projects will benefit the greatest amount of people and those most in need of trail access. The City-led public process will engage the public on trail projects on underutilized City-owned properties. Neighborhood groups or private landowners can work with the Asheville Unpaved Alliance to achieve shorter neighborhood trail connections.
208 /// GAP Plan /
A N ATIO N A L CO NT E X T Cities are building an entire identity upon their trail systems. Charlotte, Chattanooga, Knoxville, and Bentonville are all cities that are on the forefront of creating an urban trail network. These systems give the experience of being in an urban city and being completely immersed in nature within a matter of minutes. They have utilized the fringe spaces, steep slopes, creeksides, and unused public spaces to showcase the unique character of their city.
Precedents/Case Studies Bentonville, Arkansas’ Oz Trails Bentonville, Arkansas has become one of the U.S. 's premier trail towns through development of a world class city-wide trail system—with downtown as its trailhead. From the downtown square you enter a system that takes you to over 350+ miles of trail and the regional 36-mile Razorback Greenway. Components to Bentonville’s success are multifold: • A rebranded trail town and a comprehensive branded trail system: Oz (short for Ozark) Trails became the branded system for the city and the regional trails system. Leaders saw the benefit of building an urban system that capitalizes on its urban amenities. And too, these dirt trails sprawl out to the suburbs connecting them to the downtown area. Oz Trail signage and branding is regional, creative, and cohesive.
• A Strong Alliance: While the Walton Family Foundation was the cornerstone of the partnership, municipal and non-profit partners were also critical. Bentonville Parks and Recreation and Visit Bentonville, the area’s Convention and Visitors Bureau, have played key roles in the support, planning, management, and activation of the trails. • Connecting Destinations but also be the destination. Oz Trails connect a patchwork of public parks and commercial, but in many cases their trail is the destination. A series of bike parks are located along the system, creating places for mountain bikers to experience a gradient of trail challenge, from beginner to expert level. Bike playgrounds along the trails area designed for kids that have built a bike culture by growing skills and love of trails. While mountain biking is a major attraction of the Oz Trails, the system has been designed for a variety of users. User conflict is lessened through design and offering enough facilities for all. Major destinations can be accessed, like downtown’s restaurants and amenities (including a food truck court), an arts museum, state parks, and more. • Return on Investment. Oz Trails are arguably one of the more studied trail systems for economic impact. Some of the highlights of their success include: • For 2017, it was estimated that $137 million in economic benefits came to the Bentonville/ Northwest Arkansas region due to its bicycle
2
1
Image 1 / Bentonville, Arkansas’ Oz Trails Homepage. (Source: www.oztrails.com) Image 2 / Knoxville’s Urban Wilderness Homepage. (Source: www.visitknoxville.com/urban-wilderness
/
GAP Plan
/// 209
infrastructure. Over $74 million in grants and private dollars were invested into greenways and trails, making the return on investment $454,000 per mile of trail annually. Source: BBC Research and Consulting. 2018. Economic and Health Benefits of Bicycling in Northwest Arkansas. • Cycling in the area has an impact of $7 million in annual avoided health costs. • Source: BBC Research and Consulting. 2018. Economic and Health Benefits of Bicycling in Northwest Arkansas. Knoxville’s Urban Wilderness South Knoxville was once a place of urban sprawl, defunct industrial, and high speed transportation corridors. The area was blessed with large tracts of land, including several quarries with lakes, a beloved nature center, and a riverfront greenway. Partners came to envision what is now the Urban Wilderness, a connected patchwork of over 1,000 acres of public parks and natural lands, connected with 50+ miles of natural surface trails and greenways. Knoxville has now put itself on the map as an urban outdoorlover mecca and it’s success can be attributed to the following reasons: • Trails for All: The South Loop, a 12-mile multi-use natural surface trail was designed to tie a large portion of the Urban Wilderness together and to serve as a beginner/intermediate trail that would be accessed by all kinds of users, including hikers, trail runners, and mountain bikers. The South Loop was designed to slow cyclists who interact with hikers and trail runners and to serve as a collector for other trails. There are specific areas of the Urban Wilderness trails that are designed for advanced cyclists. This includes the Devil’s Racetrack, a bike park that was funded in part by a $100,00 Bell grant. A design that allows for a diversity of users has resulted in a diversity of caretakers. The local mountain bike club, trail running groups, and many other groups help maintain the system. The Urban Wilderness Alliance creates and manages the system and is made of the City of Knoxville, Knox County, a state land agency, Appalachian Mountain Bike Club, Legacy Parks Foundation, and a private foundation. • Start Small But Go Big: The Urban Wilderness trail system started simply, using on-street markers where trail connections were yet to be made. Eventually several official trailheads, several bike parks, and new parks were built as demand
210 /// GAP Plan /
intensified. In 2019, the mayor of Knoxville announced a $10 million investment into the “Wilderness Gateway”, the largest gateway into the Urban Wilderness at the end of the James White Parkway, a state divided highway slated to bisect the Urban Wilderness. Knoxville won the battle to end plans for parkway expansion and build the Wilderness Gateway at the parkway’s terminus. Several children’s bike and nature playgrounds, greenways, and a comfort station were under construction in 2020. Nearby commercial redevelopment is slated to serve and complement this public amenity. • Return on Investment: A study shows that the Urban Wilderness economic impact will grow from $8 million to nearly $30 million annually as it becomes a national outdoor recreation destination. This would be a $500,000/per mile of trail annual return on investment. Source: Economic Potential of South Knoxville’s Urban Wilderness. 2015. Howard Baker Center for Public Policy. National sports races (mountain biking and running) actively use the Urban Wilderness. Visitors and locals alike pour money into the economy as evidenced by the start of many local trail-side businesses. Local mobility has drastically increased as previous options were heavily trafficked roads that had poor or no pedestrian/bicycle infrastructure.
TH E P L A N This plan is intended to provide a model for how natural surface trails can be developed within the City. It is not intended to show every possible trail, but to indicate a framework of how the system should be developed. Through early discussion, two classifications of trails were identified, and within those classifications, trail typologies can be applied.
Trail Classes Hubs and Neighborhood Connectors are two classes of trail development that vary in purpose and method
for implementation. Table 1 shows a description of these classes, their purpose, and characteristics.
The Asheville Unpaved Hubs and Neighborhood Connectors Map Map 1 indicates where hubs and neighborhood connectors are considered. Future trail projects are not limited to what is on this map, but should fall within the framework of this guidebook.
Table 1. Trail Classifications (Hubs & Neighborhood Connectors)
Trail Classifications (Hubs & Neighborhood Connectors) Neighborhood Connectors
Trail Hubs
PURPOSE
To create neighborhood connections through private properties for quicker and more natural access. This provides an alternative route to get through neighborhoods. This might provide a shortcut, it might create a shorter connection (i.e. connecting two cul de sacs), it might just be nicer to walk in the woods than on the street.
To utilize public space for greater trail and recreation access on public lands. Trail hubs can maximize use of space with “stacked” trail loops and can connect multiple destinations. The trail is designed to be the destination, may be more indirect, or have routes that serve as more direct transportation.
NEED
Many neighborhoods in Asheville currently have community trails that are used to access through neighborhoods. This would allow for formalizing that access or to explore opportunities for new connectivity. The benefits would be less burden on the individual property owners via organized maintenance and freedom of liability in the chance of injury.
Hubs will take advantage of underutilized public space. Hubs can occur along greenway corridors either by building the trail adjacent to the planned greenway for a looped system or designing the trail to be an interim connection prior to the greenway being built.
PARTNERS
Neighborhood organizations, private entities, city and/or county governments, Asheville Unpaved Alliance.
City, county and/or state governments and Asheville Unpaved Alliance partners.
CONSIDERATIONS
Design (level of difficulty), ADA* requirements, easements for public use, MOUs needed, funding opportunities.
Design (level of difficulty and designing multi-use trails that reduce conflict), ADA requirements, MOUs needed, designing stacked looped systems, accessing multiple recreation destinations.
TRAIL TYPOLOGIES USED (SEE TYPOLOGIES), ADA REQUIREMENTS (SEE THE ADA REQUIREMENTS ON PAGE 209)
Greenway Connector or Multi-use, compliant with SODAG* if City-owned.
May vary depending on hub, the Alliance and the public will provide input on where typologies should occur. Compliance with SODAG* may be required in certain cases.
*The Standards for Outdoor Developed Areas Guidelines (SODAG) are federal guidelines developed by the Access Board that recommend accessible design for natural surface trails. Read more about this in Sustainable Trail Design Principles.
/
GAP Plan
/// 211
Map 1. Asheville Unpaved / Proposed Natural Surface Trail: Hubs and Neighborhood Connectors
212 /// GAP Plan /
Single Use Trail
Natural Surface Trail Typologies For any publicly proposed hubs and neighborhood connectors, the following typologies and design characteristics are recommended. If new trail designs are established for any new public project, they should be designed to one of these trail types and to sustainable trail guidelines outlined further in this guidebook. The Trail Typology Decision Tree (Figure 1) outlines what might be the best trail typology within a proposed hub or neighborhood connector.
Determining What Typology To Use There are some guiding principles to why certain typologies should be chosen within a hub or connector. The following principles and the Typology Decision Tree graphic will aid in determining the best typology for a location. Some of the principles that drive typology selection are: • Follow Rules for Accessibility. Does a trail need to follow accessibility guidelines? The Trail Typology Flow Chart and the Decision Tree will indicate if this is needed. This is especially important if it connects to one or more ADA facilities like a restroom.
Figure 24. How Sidewalks and Crossings Get Built.
Greenway Connector
Multi-use Trail
• Listen to the Interests of the Public. Has the public been engaged about the hub or connector and have they weighed in on the trail experience and typology they prefer? • Major Connectors Should Be Wider and Easiest to Use. Trails that are used as collector trails or as interim greenways should be wider and have gentler grades. If the terrain is steep, creating more challenging trails, consider having at least one trail that can be used by all.
/
GAP Plan
/// 213
Table 2. Natural Surface Trail Typologies
Natural Surface Trail Typologies Trail Type
Designed Use
Managed Use
Width
Surface
Average Grade
Universal Design
Trail Characteristics
Greenway Connector*
Hike
Hike/Bike
6’
Smooth
< or = to 5%
yes
Gentle ups and downs, firm and stable surface
yes
Gentle to moderate ups and downs, firm and stable surface, resting intervals
yes
Gentle ups and downs, firm and stable surface, passing spaces, resting intervals
Multi-use Trail*
Hike
Hike/Bike
5’
Smooth
5% with some short sections up to 12%
Hike
Beginner Hike
4’
Smooth
< or = to 10%
Intermediate Hike
3’
Smooth to Variable
< or = to 10%
Gentle to moderate ups and downs, resting intervals
2’
Variable to Technical
10% with some sections greater than 20%
Moderate to steep ups and downs
4’
Smooth
< or = 10% with some short sections up to 15%
Gentle to moderate ups and downs
3’
Variable to Technical
10% with some short sections up to 20%
Uneven soil surface with some roots and rocks; gentle to moderate ups and downs; rollers, bermed turns, and technical trail features with bypasses
10% with some sections greater than 20%
Uneven soil surface dominated by rocky, rooty, natural terrain features; moderate to steep ups and downs with considerable change in elevation; bermed turns, technical trail features (built or natural obstacles requiring negotiation such as drop offs, jump lines, rock gardens, gap jumps, skinnies, and teeter totters)
Advanced Hike
Single Use Trail*
Bike
Beginner Bike
Intermediate Bike
Advanced Bike
2’
Technical
*An accessible trail may be needed. To determine if an accessible trail is needed, see Figures 1 and 2.
214 /// GAP Plan /
Figure 1.. Trail Typologies Decision Tree: Decision Flow Chart
/
GAP Plan
/// 215
Creating and Maintaining Accessible Trails The City desires to, and in some cases is obligated to, require universal design, or accessible design of trails. Universal design trail principles allow for the independence, integration, and dignity of everyone through designing trails for users of all abilities. As a rule of thumb—if you can use a stroller or children’s bike carrier—it is likely an accessible trail. The following information provides a brief overview of the policy to include accessible design in overall planning and what it should look like in the design and construction phase. Once accessible trails are built, it is also critical they are maintained as such and that the maintainers understand these specifications. The following are factors that determine whether universal design should be considered in the Asheville Unpaved system: • Does the area considered already have accessible trails? If no, consider integrating at least one universally designed trail. • Does the trail connect to a public facility that is accessible (most structures, restrooms, and parking lots are considered accessible)? If yes, the trail should be accessible. • Is the terrain gentle enough and is it within quick access of parking that it makes sense to be accessible? • Is its design goal to be a single-use typology mountain biking trail? If so, it can be excluded from accessible requirements, unless it is connecting to a public facility.
Federal & State Policy on Accessibility Federal policy is the best and most defensible guidance to use when considering policies and design guidelines. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires all forms of government services to comply with laws for accessibility. ADA design requirements vaguely address trails. Because of this, the Access Board in partnership with federal land management partners developed the Standards for Outdoor Developed Areas Guidelines (SODAG). These guidelines are not written into law but are the best practices that are followed by federal agencies and are recommended for local governments to follow. Federal agencies are required to follow SODAG’s design specifications for trails, but use of federal funding does not require following the guidelines. The Department of Justice will not enforce the guidelines upon local governments. Universal Access Trails and Shared Use Paths, 2014. Goldstein and
216 /// GAP Plan /
Knutson, Pennsylvania Land Trust Association, is one of the best guiding documents to further explore these guidelines, including detailed specifications for building accessible trails. Figure 26 can be used to determine whether accessible trail specifications should be used.
When to Use Accessible Trail: Decision Tree Flow Chart This decision chart (see Figure 2) is based on the Standards for Outdoor Developed Areas Guidelines (SODAG) developed by the Access Board.
The Partnership: The Asheville Unpaved Alliance The Asheville Unpaved Alliance began as a task force where members identified their role in the implementation of the Asheville Unpaved vision. Figure 27 shows where members felt their roles in implementation would be.
Alliance Structure, Roles, and Governance The Alliance will champion projects at all stages including planning, funding, permitting, development, and maintenance of the trail. The Alliance will also collectively prioritize projects and develop an annual work plan. Asheville Unpaved Alliance members can have project specific responsibilities and will present specific natural surface trail projects to the Alliance for review and approval. Non-Alliance organizations and individuals may bring projects to the Alliance, but would need an Alliance partner to sponsor the project. The Alliance’s mission and actions include: • Identify hub or connector projects • Get consensus on and follow design standards in planning and implementation • Create and follow policies to determine, prioritize, fund and implement projects • Collaborate on an annual work plan with consensus on projects to be implemented • Alliance partners will commit to or assist some component of the work plan • Create and maintain natural surface trails
Figure 2. When to Use Accessible Trail: Decision Flow Chart.
/
GAP Plan
/// 217
Figure 3. What Asheville Unpaved Alliance Members Most Interested in Helping With?
WHAT ARE ALLIANCE MEMBERS MOST INTERESTED IN HELPING WITH?
Checklist of Questions As Projects Are Submitted to the Annual Work Plan As projects are identified and submitted to the Alliance, the following questions should be addressed prior to project submission. 1. Is the property/corridor/public access secured by the City or non-profit through fee simple ownership or easement? 2. Has a partner(s) been identified for the project both to oversee design and implementation as well as maintenance? If a non-Alliance organization brings a project to the table, an alliance member will sponsor it. 3. Has a trail concept been created? 4. Does the trail system have public access/a trailhead? If not, will public access be an issue or create issues? 5. Has there been public input and if opposition or concerns arise, have they been addressed? The City of Asheville will take the lead in the public process, but Alliance partners will assist in this process.
218 /// GAP Plan /
6. Is there a cost estimate and funding strategy for design, construction, and maintenance? Estimates should adequately address all aspects including contractor fees, permitting, signage, trail access, etc. If supported by Alliance members, the project is placed on the annual work plan.
The Annual Work Plan The annual work plan addresses implementation of Asheville Unpaved projects. Partners and Alliance members should work together to complete the following steps: 1. Create and execute a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to outline the roles and responsibilities of the City, the Alliance, and Partner(s) in project implementation and maintenance. The MOU should address who is responsible for each step listed below. 2. Secure property/corridor/public access through fee simple ownership or easement by the City or an environmental non-profit.
3. Flag trail alignment in the field that follows sustainable design principles. 4. Present a detailed project summary to the Alliance for review. The concept should address project specifications, potential permitting requirements, approximate cost, and implementation feasibility. 5. Revise detailed project concept based on Alliance feedback to present to the City of Asheville Development Services Department (DSD) for review by the Planning and Zoning, and Grading, Stormwater and Flood disciplines. The City will determine and outline permitting requirements for the project. 6. Create a final cost estimate for the project (consider permitting, structures, signage, contract trailwork, volunteer trail work). 7. Create a funding, implementation, and maintenance strategy for the project.
M A IN TEN A NC E A strategy for maintenance and trail assessment will be needed as trails are implemented. A strategy is needed to address annual or 2-3 year maintenance needs that are known to be ongoing, or needs that occur because of storms or other one-time events. Several options exist for maintenance, and a combination of these may be the best approach:
Contracting Professional Maintenance Contracted maintenance will allow for professionally led maintainers to oversee larger maintenance projects or maintenance that has greater liability (i.e. major tree removal, bridge repair). Contracted maintenance can be planned for in the yearly work plan or executed as a multi-year contract. Professional contractors should be qualified and knowledgeable in trail repair best practices and sustainable trail design. Contractors can also be on-call to quickly respond to bigger maintenance requests from storm damage or other one-time events. Contractors should hold liability insurance. Trail clubs and other qualified nonprofits can qualify under this category as well as trail builders.
Volunteer Maintenance & Community Support
aspect to maintaining the trail system but should not be the only method relied upon to ensure maintenance is done. Volunteer hours should be documented by the Alliance to communicate community investment and can also serve as matches to grants. Several options could allow for community support, including: • Trail Adoption: One or more organizations could adopt a trail for an agreed amount of time. Adoption could mean the following: • The adoptee(s) fiscally sponsor maintenance, providing funds to contract professional maintenance. • The adoptee(s) provide volunteer hours at work days where a sponsoring maintenance professional can sponsor volunteers under their insurance and provide trail maintenance training. Regular trail maintenance could include tasks like vegetative clearing, trail deberming, and other recurring tasks. • A Trail Endowment Fund: The Trail Alliance may choose to collaboratively fundraise for an endowment that goes toward system-wide trail maintenance and funds are prioritized as part of the work plan.
Maintenance Agreements Standard MOUs • Template MOU between City and Alliance Membership • ATC/NPS Appalachian Trail Cooperative Agreement • Template MOU between City and Project Partner (project specific) Here are some examples of MOU’s: • Carolina Mountain Club Maintenance Agreements • New York-New Jersey Trail Conference example MOUs • Knoxville Urban Wilderness Does a Contract Agreement (provided to the City by Pisgah SORBA) • Knoxville’s Urban Wilderness Trails RFP (proposal for contract)
A critical aspect to Asheville Unpaved is that it is a community-supported initiative. Community volunteering and trail adoption will be an important
/
GAP Plan
/// 219
Trail Easements If a proposed trail for the Asheville Unpaved system is not on public land, then a trail easement should be explored. The City of Asheville or a partner with the ability to hold easements are both potential easement holders. Some of the terms that should be addressed in trail easements could be: • Location and width of the trail • Allowed uses • Allowed structures, facilities within the easement (fences, shelters, etc) • Hours of operation • Management of natural resources, the landscape, and other features within the easement • Liability, who is liable if there is accident • If the trail is impacted or if there are maintenance needs, who is responsible for them
an owner who invited or permits any person to use land for a purpose for which the land is regularly used and for which a price or fee is usually charged even if it is not charged in that instance, or to an owner whose purpose in extending an invitation or granting permission is to promote a commercial enterprise.”
SU STAI NABL E T R AI L D ESIGN PRI NCI PL ES Sustainable trail design minimizes soil erosion and protects the natural resource, while providing for the desired experience. A common design and construction standard among trail designers are the five essential elements of sustainable trails as outlined in the International Mountain Bicycling Association’s (IMBA) publication Trail Solutions. These elements are also referenced in the USFS Trail Construction and Maintenance Notebook – 2007 Edition. They include: 1. The Half Rule
A trail easement template was developed by the Pennsylvania Land Trust Association and can be found here: https://conservationtools.org/library_items/323/ files/2437
2. The Ten Percent Average Guideline
Liability
5. Outslope
NC Recreation Statute and Liability Related to Easements & Trails The North Carolina General Assembly enacted the Recreational Use Statute (N.C. Gen. Stat. § 38A-4) in an effort “to encourage owners of land to make land and water areas available to the public at no cost for educational and recreational purposes.” Under GS 38A-4, a landowner that allows the public onto their land for recreational or educational purposes owes them the same duty of care they would owe a trespasser. In order to be covered by the Recreational Use Statute, the landowner cannot charge a fee for access and they must refrain from willfully or wantonly inflicting injury on the public.
The five essential elements limit the volume and velocity of water on the trail tread which minimizes the amount of soil erosion, impact, and resource damage that occurs on and adjacent to the trail. Following these essential elements of sustainable trails also creates a trail that has a gentle grade, follows the contours of the terrain, is slightly outsloped, and meanders and undulates frequently to remove water from the trail surface and create userinterest.
The Recreational Use Statute states, “Except as specifically recognized by or provided for in this act, an owner of land who either directly or indirectly invited or permits without charge any person to use such land for educational or recreational purposes owes the person the same duty of care that he owes a trespasser, except nothing in this act shall be construed to limit or nullify the doctrine of attractive nuisance, and the owner shall inform direct invitees of artificial or unusual hazards of which the owner has actual knowledge. This section does not apply to
220 /// GAP Plan /
3. Maximum Sustainable Grade 4. Grade Reversals
The Standards for Outdoor Developed Areas Guidelines (SODAG) provide guidance for maximizing the accessibility of trails in the natural setting. These guidelines are not written into law, but state and local governments and private entities may use the provisions for guidance when designing trails. The guidelines outline technical requirements that address the trail surface, clear tread width, passing spaces, tread obstacles, slope or grade, resting intervals, cross slope, and trailhead signs. Following the SODAG typically supports the physical sustainability of the trail and provides a higher quality user experience.
Table 3. Standards for Outdoors Developed Areas Guidelines (SODAG) Technical Requirements
Standards for Outdoors Developed Areas Guidelines (SODAG) Technical Requirements Item
Specifications
Trail Surface
Firm and Stable
Clear Tread Width
> or = 36”
Passing Spaces
Every 1000’ When Trail Width is < 60” with a Maximum 5% Cross Slope
Tread Obstacles
Slope or Grade
HALF RULE
Trail 15% grade
Sideslope 20% grade
This trail breaks the half rule
Trail 8% grade
Sideslope 20% grade
< or = 2” Steeper than
But Not Steeper Than
Maximum Distance
0%
5%
Any
5%
8.33%
200’
8.33%
10%
30’
10%
Figure 4. Sustainable Trail Design Principles
12%
This trail meets the half rule
GRADE REVERSAL Water trapped on the trail
10’
Resting Intervals
Level Area > or = to 60” in Length When Slope or Grade > 5%
Cross Slope
< or + 5%
Signs
Must include length of the trail or trail segment, type of trail surface, typical and minimum trail tread width, typical and maximum trail grade, and typical and maximum trail cross slope.
A negative grade followed by a positive grade allows water to exit the trail
A firm surface is defined as a surface that is not noticeably distorted or compressed by a device that simulates a person using a wheelchair. A stable surface is not permanently affected by normally occurring weather conditions and can sustain wear and tear during normal use between planned maintenance cycles. A firm and stable surface prevents assistive devices like a cane, crutches, or wheelchair from sinking into the surface. While not scientifically accurate, an effective method for determining firmness and stability is to consider these two questions. If the answer to both questions is yes, the surface is probably firm and stable. 1. Could a person ride a narrow-tired bicycle across the surface easily without making ruts? 2. Could a folding stroller with small, narrow plastic wheels containing a toddler be pushed easily across the surface without making ruts?
A more scientifically accurate method utilizes a rotational penetrometer tool to evaluate surfaces. Some natural soils can be compacted so they are firm and stable. Soil particle size and and shape affect the physical properties of the soil, which includes ability to drain and cohesiveness. Distinct soil types and varieties may vary widely within a single site. Clay and loamy soils tend to stick together when the soil is dry, making it firm and stable.
/
GAP Plan
/// 221
S TA NDARD TR AIL CO N ST R U C T IO N S PEC IFICATIO N S When building sustainable natural surface trails, it is crucial the trail builder knows how to construct them properly. A professional trailbuilder should have a great understanding of how to design a good trail, be able to identify the opportunities and constraints in a project area, and be able to provide effective plans and communications about the project to its clients and the general public. An ideal trail contractor will be part of the Professional Trail Builders Association. Trail work and construction includes but is not limited to the following tasks: clearing, grubbing, excavation, back sloping, deberming, compacting, and construction of grade dips, grade reversals, climbing turns, rolling crown switchbacks, and retaining walls. The trail shall be sustainable, constructed to minimize erosion and require little maintenance. Water shall exit the trail often via self-cleaning grade reversals and/or dips below the trail grade. Earthen waterbars constructed across the trail are not acceptable for sustainable trail construction. The trail shall appear as narrow as possible while still maintaining the required tread width. The following specifications and standards cannot cover all aspects of trail construction. They are simply intended to relay the intent of the owner.
close to the ground, not exceeding three feet in height. Brush shall not be placed in piles. • In areas where an existing trail is to be abandoned and rehabilitated, the cut and removed brush and vegetation may be used to help accomplish this purpose.
Tread Construction • Corridor width and height and tread width will be specified for each project. • Work shall be completed with hand tools or low impact mechanized equipment with a footprint no wider than the specified trail tread unless approved by the project manager. • Unless otherwise specified, the trail shall be constructed with a “full bench cut” in which the entire trail tread is built on solid ground. A “partial bench cut” or “cut and fill” should only be utilized if a full bench cut is not feasible due to rock outcrops, slabs, or other natural features. • The trail backslope shall transition smoothly to the hillside above.
Tree Cutting
• All trail tread shall be out sloped 3-5%.
• The trail shall be aligned to avoid removal of trees greater than 6” in diameter at breast height where possible. Any trees greater than 6” the contractor believes need to be cut shall be approved by the project manager and follow permit requirements.
• All vegetative/root matter in the trail tread shall be removed except for large feeder roots which shall be covered with soil to raise the trail tread above the roots.
• Stumps located in the trail tread shall be completely removed. Those located in the trail corridor shall be cut flush to the ground. Stumps and root balls that have been completely removed shall be placed at least 30 feet from the edge of the trail corridor to minimize their appearance from the trail.
Brush Removal • The trail corridor shall be cleared of all limbs, brush, vines and vegetation. Cut limbs shall not protrude from the main stem. All branches shall be cut just outside of the branch collar to promote sealing of the wound. • Vegetation cut from the trail corridor shall be moved at least 30 feet from the edge of the trail corridor. The cut end shall not be visible from the trail. • Cut and removed brush and vegetation shall be placed
222 /// GAP Plan /
• The trail tread shall have a compacted mineral soil surface. Compaction shall be completed using a mechanized tamper such as a vibrating plate compactor. The trail bed shall be shaped to leave an even, compacted, uniform surface free of indentations or protruding roots and stumps. The grading of trail tread, back slope, and drainage features shall be finished to a smooth, stable surface. • Excavated material shall be evenly distributed downhill of the trail tread and shall not form a berm on the outer edge of the tread that will restrict the natural flow of water across and off the trail. • The contractor shall not complete more than 500 feet of new trail construction before “finishing” the trail tread and backslope in the manner described above. • Trails constructed within 100 feet of streams shall be completed and stabilized by the end of each work day.
• Excavated and disturbed soil outside of the trail tread and backslope shall be evenly distributed and covered with leaves, organic debris, and other natural materials to aid in aesthetics and sedimentation and erosion control. There shall be 50% coverage at a minimum.
Trail Grades • Grade reversals and grade dips shall be constructed to remove water from the trail tread. All needed grade reversals and/or grade dips will be done according to IMBA standards as specified in their book “Trail Solutions.” • Grades shall not exceed 10%. In instances where the terrain requires a slope of 10-15% for short distances, grade reversals/dips will be required within ten feet of the top of the slope and along the trail tread as necessary.
Climbing Turns • All needed climbing turns shall be designed and constructed according to IMBA standards as specified in their book “Trail Solutions”. • Climbing turns shall be constructed only on side slopes of 7% or less. • The turn radius shall be as wide as possible with a minimum of 20 feet.
• Retaining walls for constructed switchbacks shall be carefully built to ensure stability of the platform and the lower leg of the trail. All fill material shall be thoroughly compacted. If dense vegetation is not present, barriers such as logs, large stones, or brush shall be placed inside the switchback to prevent users from short cutting the switchback.
Trail Reroutes and Rehabilitation of Abandoned Trail • All trail reroutes will include “rehabilitating” the existing “abandoned trail” by using dead vegetation, rocks and/ or other approved natural materials to disguise the trail. The abandoned trail tread shall be scarified to promote natural seeding and growth. Rehabilitation shall be done as each reroute section is complete. • Any man made materials located on the “abandoned trail” shall be removed and carried off site unless they are aiding in the rehabilitation and closure of the trail. Agency staff will make this determination.
Use of Natural Materials • Rocks and native soil may be “harvested” from near the work site, as approved by agency staff, provided the areas harvested from are graded out so as to not create new holes, erosion issues, and/or unnatural looking areas.
• Grade reversals shall be located immediately before and after the turn.
• Areas harvested from shall be “rehabilitated” by placing leaves and/or dead plant materials over any bare soil with a minimum of 50% coverage.
Rolling Crown Switchbacks
Restrictions
• All needed rolling crown switchbacks shall be designed and constructed according to IMBA standards as specified in their book “Trail Solutions”.
1. Trees retained alongside the trail shall not be scarred, skinned, or damaged by trail equipment. Where damage is likely, the tree bark shall be protected.
• On side slopes greater than 7%, rolling crown switchbacks shall be constructed.
2. The contractor will be responsible for and repair any damage caused by movement of equipment or materials.
• Switchbacks shall have a near level turning platform that is slightly crowned. The upper leg shall be insloped at 5% and shall create a drain extending well beyond the platform. The lower leg shall be outsloped at 5% for proper drainage. Grade reversals shall be located immediately before and after the switchback.
3. No pesticides, herbicides, or growth regulating chemicals shall be permitted in the construction of the trail unless by a certified invasive plant specialist.
/
GAP Plan
/// 223
P RO P O S ED T R A I L R AT I NG S SY ST EM The following system of trail ratings is proposed to standardize trails across the Asheville Unpaved trail system. Trails should also be maintained to this standard once they are officially designated a trail rating. Table 4. Proposed Trail Rating System
PROPOSED TRAIL RATING SYSTEM All trails are for the recreational experience and allow for hiking, running, and biking unless otherwise posted.
Trail Rating
Easiest
Easy
More Difficult
Very Difficult
Extremely Difficult
White Circle
Green Circle
Blue Square
Black Diamond
Double Black Diamond
Mtn. Biking/ Hiking (shared or single use determined for each trail)
Mtn. Biking
Primary Use
Recreation
Recreation
Trail Typology
Greenway Connector
Multi-use Trail
Single-Use
Trail Width
6’-0” min.
5’’-0” min.
Varies 2’-4’
Bridge Width
6’-0” min.
5’’-0” min.
24” min., or rock armoring of stream
Bridge Guardrails
42” ht., For drop-offs over 30” min.
Mtn. Biking
Does not apply.
Does not apply.
Does not apply.
Handrails
36” ht.
36” ht.
Does not apply.
Does not apply.
Does not apply.
Tread Surface
Firm and stable
Firm and stable
Mostly stable, some variability
Widely variable
Widely variable and unpredictable
Running Slope, Typ
4.5% max.
5% max.
10% max.
15% max.
20% min.
Trail segments 15% max.
Trail segments over 15%
Trail segments over 20%
5% max.
5% max.
5% max.
Unavoidable obstacles 8” max.
Unavoidable obstacles 15” max.; possible loose rocks
Running Slope, Max.
Cross Slope, Typ.
Obstacles / Technical Features
Resting Intervals / Passing Area
224 /// GAP Plan /
Trail segments 10%-12% max., shall be 10’-0” max. Trail segments 8.33%-10% max., shall be 30’-0” max. Trail segments 5%-8.33% max., shall be 200’-0” max. 5% max., 2% for bridges
5% max., 2% for bridges
Avoidable or no obstacles
Unavoidable obstacles 2” max. and 0.5” max. on bridges
Tread gaps 0.5” max.
Required at ends of trail segments over 5% 5’-0” min. x trail width, 5% max. or 2% for bridges
Tread gaps 0.5” max.
Features 24” max. ht. and 12” min. width
Required at ends of trail segments over 5%, and every 1,000’ when trail width is under 5’.
Does not apply
5’-0” x 5’-0”, min. and 5% max. or 2% for bridges
Unavoidable obstacles 15” min.; possible loose rocks
Features 4’-0” max. ht. and 24” max width
Features 4’-0” min. ht. and widely variable width
Does not apply
Does not apply.
/
GAP Plan
/// 225
N EX T S TEP S F O R A S H E V I L L E U N PAV ED As Asheville Unpaved launches as a program, some of the following actions will be needed on an ongoing basis. Below are actions to maintain the momentum of Asheville Unpaved.
Sustain and Continue to Build the Asheville Unpaved Alliance Continue to build the Alliance with non-profit, community, government, and private partners. The support of the partners/members is critical for advocacy and funding opportunities. Meet regularly enough with the broad Alliance to maintain momentum, buy-in, and relationships.
Plan Yearly Core Alliance partners should be involved in yearly action planning to set direction and ensure the Asheville Unpaved trail system is being properly managed. Yearly action planning can include setting goals and actions for the following year, target new capital projects, and address trail system management maintenance needs. The City of Asheville and Buncombe County both run on a fiscal year starting in July, with most budgetary decisions being made at the beginning of the year.
Fund It A multi-year and yearly fundraising plan will be critical to accelerating the expansion of the Asheville Unpaved trail system. Community fundraising campaigns (both crowd-funding and business contributions) will be critical to show community support. Grants will likely be needed for bigger trail construction projects that typically range in the hundreds of thousand dollars. Spring and Fall are typical grant deadline seasons. Fundraising twenty to thirty percent of total project cost locally will be important, as most grants require this.
226 /// GAP Plan /
Grassroots Connection, Advocacy, and Volunteer Development The Alliance is made of many membership-based organizations which can be a powerful resource to both advocate for and provide volunteers to maintain trails. Alliance members and their constituency can work to build community support and awareness, take part in crowd-fundraising, and take part in the care of the trail system.
Community Engagement Community engagement is a critical part of project planning. Wherever trails are being planned on public property or with public investment, community engagement will be critical in early phases of the planning process. Asheville Unpaved Pilot Projects will undergo community engagement, including coordination with surrounding neighborhoods to solicit feedback on projects.
Trail Design and Construction Future trail projects will start with early conceptual planning, ideally performed by a skilled trail planner or builder, of which there are many in Western North Carolina. Early conceptual planning should convey what trail typologies are being proposed. More detailed design and trail flagging would occur post community engagement and ideally done within a year or less of the trail going to bid or being built. This guidebook and the included trail specifications are critical to ensure trails are built sustainably.
Promote and Activate Utilize the Alliance to promote Asheville Unpaved and its positive impacts in the community. Bring community leaders along as Asheville Unpaved expands. Provide promotional material, signage, and online engagement that brings in new users. Activate the trails with events, celebrations, and programming. Connect the trails to non-traditional users and find ways to introduce the trails to new users or find ways to remove barriers to users access trails (social, abilities, etc). Clinics, rides, walking groups, and more can activate and build supporters. Engage users to become stewards of Asheville Unpaved through volunteerism. Consider that the community built around, and the experience of using the trails, will become the Asheville Unpaved brand experience.
Measure It Begin to measure the impact of Asheville Unpaved early. Money raised, hours volunteered, and people engaged, are all important metrics to record. A baseline is important to establish to show impact. With this baseline, consider measuring metrics that will show return on investment. Surveys, interviews, trail counters, collecting pre-andpost data from trail side businesses, and economic impact studies are all measurements means that can show impact.
/
GAP Plan
/// 227
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
ALTERNATIVES TO SIDEWALKS GUIDEBOOK
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
● ● ● ●
○ ○ ○
○ ○
●
● ●
● ● ●
PEDESTRIAN ACCOMMODATIONS IN WORK ZONES DESIGN GUIDANCE AND CHECKLIST
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
Pedestrian Accommodations In Work Zones Design Guidance and Checklist OVERVIEW The attached guidance and design checklist were developed to help designers ensure that accommodations are made for pedestrians of all abilities when the Pedestrian Access Route (PAR) is temporarily closed due to construction, alterations, maintenance or other temporary conditions. This checklist includes items to be addressed when developing a plan to accommodate pedestrians for all work on or near sidewalks or walking paths. This applies to work activity for the following scenarios: • Working near the sidewalk or walking path, but the sidewalk/path remains open. • Diversion of sidewalk or path around the work activity, or sidewalk is temporarily closed. • Pedestrians detoured to an alternate existing sidewalk or path. The goal of work zone accomodations is to avoid pedestrian conflicts on the worksite, avoid pedestrian conflicts with motorists, maintain access to transit, and maintain a safe, convenient path that matches accessibility of the existing route to the maximum extent feasible. Accommodations through work zones commonly use Temporary Traffic Control (TTC) and are commonly referred to as TTC zones.
THE REQUIREMENT When an existing pedestrian access route is blocked by construction, alteration work, maintenance, or other temporary conditions, accommodations must be provided for pedestrians who use that sidewalk or path, including individuals with disabilities. The current standards for maintaining an accessible route are contained within the 2010 ADA Standards and the 2009 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control (MUTCD). In addition, the Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) is a proposed ruling that has not yet been adopted by the Department of Justice as the ADA standard. However, this proposed ruling is a widely accepted standard practice and contains useful guidance on temporary accessible pedestrian accommodations. The key requirement for temporary traffic control accommodations from these manuals is summarized below. Note that the MUTCD references below are based on the most current 2009 Edition and should be updated upon release of future editions.
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) Part 6: Temporary Traffic Control: Temporary Traffic Control plans must be in accordance with the standards and guidance of the latest version of the MUTCD, which requires that: MUTCD Section 6A.01: “02 The needs and control of all road users (motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians within the highway, or on private roads open to public travel, including persons with disabilities in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), through a TTC zone shall be an essential part of highway construction, utility work, maintenance operations, and the management of traffic incidents.” Part 6 - Standard: 02: “The needs and control of all road users (motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians within the highway, or on private roads open to the public travel…., including persons with disabilities in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), Title II, Paragraph 35.130) through TTC zone shall be an essential part of highway construction, utility work, maintenance operations, and the management of traffic incidents.” The Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) R205 Alternate Pedestrian Access Route: “When an existing pedestrian access route is blocked by construction, alteration, maintenance, or other temporary conditions, an alternate pedestrian access route complying to the maximum extent feasible with R301 [Pedestrian Access Route requirements], R302 [Alternate Circulation Path requirements] and Section 6D.01 adn 6D.02 of the MUTCD…shall be provided.”
PLANNING AND DESIGN GUIDANCE AND STANDARDS The guidance and requirements for accomodating pedestrians is further described in Sections 6D.01 and 6D.02 of the MUTCD, and depends on factors such as the type of work being performed, the duration of the work and the hazards and impediments the work will create for pedestrians and bicyclists. For TTC zones where work crews are present and will last only a few hours or less, the accommodation may be as simple as:
/
GAP Plan
/// 1
1. Determining how pedestrians might be affected by the work activity, 2. Establishing a plan about how the crew will assist any pedestrians (especially individuals with vision or mobility disabilities) in negotiating the work zone, and 3. Identifying someone to watch for pedestrians and initiate the plan if the need arises. On the other hand, TTC zones left in place over several days that do not have workers present at all times will require more extensive efforts to accommodate pedestrians. Pedestrians will need to be accommodated throughout the entire TTC zone. The TTC zone begins with the initial advance warning sign (e.g., ROAD WORK AHEAD) and ends at the END ROAD WORK sign, the last TTC device, or where traffic resumes normal operations. Additional principles identified in MUTCD Section 6G.05 Guidance are as follows:
• Pedestrians should be separated from worksite by appropriate devices that maintain the accessibility and detectability for pedestrians with disabilities. (Section 6G.05 (04))
• Pedestrians should not be exposed to unprotected excavations, open utility access, overhanging equipment, etc. (Section 6G.05 (05))
• Pedestrian detours should be avoided since pedestrians rarely observe... (Section 6G.05 (07)) “pedestrians rarely observe them and the cost of providing accessibility and detectability might outweigh the cost of maintaining a continuous route.”
2 /// GAP Plan /
GUIDEBOOKS AND CHECKLISTS FOR WORK ZONE DESIGNERS The following resources were prepared with funding from the Federal Highway Association (FHWA) to assist with development of guides, resources and checklists for designing for pedestrians in work zones. • Pedestrian Considerations: Updated Checklist for Temporary Traffic Control Zones https://www.workzonesafety.org/files/documents/training/ fhwa_wz_grant/atssa_pedestrian_checklist.pdf
American Traffic Safety Services Association (ATSSA) and FHWA, March 2021 • Applying the Americans with Disabilities Act In Work Zones: A Practitioners Guide https://www.workzonesafety.org/files/documents/training/ fhwa_wz_grant/ada_guide.pdf
OTHER KEY RESOURCES • "The Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines for Buildings and Facilities (ADAAG)," July 1998 Edition • Proposed “Accessibility Guidelines for the Public Rights-of-Way” (PROWAG) • https://connect.ncdot.gov/projects/WZTC/Pages/ default.aspx • "Designing Sidewalks and Trails for Access—Part 2—Best Practices Design Guide (FHWA-EP-01-027)," 2001 Edition (FHWA) • "Accessible Pedestrian Signals—A Guide to Best Practices (NCHRP Web-Only Document 117A)," 2008 Edition (Transportation Research Board—TRB) • "Guidelines for Accessible Pedestrian Signals (NCHRP Web-Only Document 117B)," 2008 Edition (TRB)
American Traffic Safety Services Association (ATSSA) and FHWA, 2012 • Guidance Sheet - Temporary Traffic Control Zone Pedestrian Access Considerations https://www.workzonesafety.org/files/documents/training/ fhwa_wz_grant/atssa_guidance_sheet.pdf
American Traffic Safety Services Association (ATSSA) and FHWA • Guidelines for Work Zone Designers: Pedestrian and Bicycle Accommodations: https://www.workzonesafety.org/files/documents/training/ fhwa_wz_grant/uw_wz_designer_guidelines_pedestrian_ bicycle_accommodation-508.pdf
Traffic Operations & Safety (TOPS) Laboratory University of Wisconsin – Madison and FHWA, June 2018 • Pedestrian Accomodation in Work Zones: A Field Guide: https://www.workzonesafety.org/files/documents/training/ fhwa_wz_grant/artba_pedestrian_accommodation_wz.pdf
Americay Road and Transportation Builders Association (ARTBA) and FHWA, February 2018
/
GAP Plan
/// 3
Design Checklist and Submission Requirements
TRAFFIC CONTROL FOR PEDESTRIANS IN WORK ZONES
Evaluate Existing Pedestrian Access Route __________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Document Duration / Scope of Project ________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Evaluate Potential for Errant Vehicles __________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Document Crossing Road Information (Location, Traffic Volume, Posted Speed and Truck %) ___________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Evaluate Home and Business Impacts ________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Evaluate Nearby Pedestrian Generators and Users (Schools / Elderly / Individuals with Disabilities) _____________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Evaluate Impacted Transit Access ____________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Evaluate Lighting / Sight Distances Conditions for Temporary Pedestrian Road Crossings ________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Document Temporary Pedestrian Accommodations* ____________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ *Temporary route should be on the same side of the street as existing (to the maximum extent feasible).
4 /// GAP Plan /
Review the following Temporary PAR specific design checklists and guidance information and document the results. If applicable, complete and save documentation of technical infeasibility. (Exhibit 1)
• Exhibit 2: TPAR ADA Standards and PROWAG Best Practices Compliant
Not Applicable
Other: ________________________________________________________________________
• Exhibit 3: Pedestrian Channelization Compliant
Not Applicable
Other: ________________________________________________________________________
• Exhibit 4: Traffic Barriers Compliant
Not Applicable
Other: ________________________________________________________________________
• Exhibit 5: Detectable Edging Compliant
Not Applicable
Other: ________________________________________________________________________
• Exhibit 6: Audible Messaging Compliant
Not Applicable
Other: ________________________________________________________________________
• Exhibit 7: Temporary Curb Ramps Compliant
Not Applicable
Other: ________________________________________________________________________
• Exhibit 8: Overhead Activity and Covered Walkways Compliant
Not Applicable
Other: ________________________________________________________________________
Document Technical Infeasibility (Exhibit 1) Develop and Document Project Public Information Plan regarding Pedestrian Detours and Related Accomodations ___________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
/
GAP Plan
/// 5
EXHIBIT 1: EXAMPLE TECHNICAL INFEASIBILITY DOCUMENTATION Describe locations of any existing pedestrian access routes that are infeasible to accommodate in an ADA compliant manner during construction? If you choose to attach a map or plan, please indicate that here: _________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Accessible to Maximum Extent Feasible Reason accommodations are not feasible: ____________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Describe how this route has been designed to be ADA compliant to the maximum extent feasible or indicate the alternative means of accommodations in the section below: __________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
MUCTO Section 6D.01.05 - Alternative Accommodations In the case of infeasibility, an alternate means of providing for pedestrians may be used, e.g.
Free bus service Assigning someone to guide pedestrians with disabilities Other ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Source: Ron W Eck, PE - NC LAP (left) Figure 30. Barricade with ADA detectable bottom edge. Note: vertical stripes are non-MUTCD compliant. Stripes should slant toward the center. Source: www. pedbikeimages.org/Dan Burden (right)
6 /// GAP Plan /
EXHIBIT 2: TPAR ADA STANDARDS AND PROWAG DIMENSIONS _____ Y/N: Are all temporary pedestrian access routes designed to meet ADA standards and PROWAG guideance to the maximum extent feasible? See standards and guidance below.
ADA and Proposed Public Right-of-Way Dimensions PAR Requirements Per ADA Standards and Proposed PROWAG Design Element
Sidewalk and Pedestrian Access Route
Criteria
Notes
Width
Min 4.0 feet
Median/Island: Min 5.0 feet
Passing Spaces
Min 5.0 feet by 5.0 feet at max 200 feet intervals
Necessary where the clear width is less than 5.0 feet
Grade
Matching street grade
Where feasible, max 5%
Cross Slope*
Max 2%
See PROWAG for exceptions discussion
Surface
Firm, stable, and slip resistant
Vertical Discontinuities
Max 0.5 inches
Horizontal Openings
Max 0.5 inches
Horizontal Protrusions
Less than 4inches (4.5 inches for Handrails)
Greater protrusions for signs and devices are permitted if greater than 84” (per MUTCD) above the surface see PROWAG Section R402 Graphic for more information.
Max 2.5 feet
Non-freight rail track
Max 3.0 feet
Freight rail track
Flangeways Gaps
Beveled with a slope less 50% (0.25 feet - 0.5 feet)
* Proposed PROWAG Guidance for crosswalk at signals (with no stop or yield control): maximum cross slope = 5%
Section R402 - Protruding Objects *MUTCD Requires 84" minimum
*
Source: https://www.access-board.gov/ada/guides/chapter-3protruding-objects/#limits-of-protruding-objects
/
GAP Plan
/// 7
EXHIBIT 2: SURFACE REQUIREMENTS AND OPTIONS _____ Y/N: Are all temporary pedestrian access routes designed to meet ADA standards and PROWAG guideance to the maximum extent feasible? See standards and guidance below.
Smooth Continuous Surface - Firm, Stable and Slip Resistant •
Consider Service Life - Proportionate Durability
•
See Options List Below
•
See Chapter 5 FHWA Funded: “Guidelines for Work Zone Designer - Pedestrian and Bicycle Accommodation” https://www.workzonesafety.org/files/documents/training/fhwa_wz_grant/uw_wz_designer_ guidelines_pedestrian_bicycle_accommodation-508.pdf
Possible Surface Options (see “Guidelines for Work Zone Designers,” UW-M TOPS Lap) • Asphalt • Controlled Low Strength Material (CLSM) • Stabilized Soil • Well-Compacted Gravel • Proprietary Matting Systems • Plywood • Oriented Strand Board (OSB) • Timber
Source: Guidelines for Work Zone Designers (UW-M TOPS Lab) Figure 78 (Source: Oxford Plastics LLC)
8 /// GAP Plan /
EXHIBIT 3: CHANNELIZING DEVICES _____ Y/N: Where exposed to adjacent construction, traffic or other hazards, are all pedestrian routes protected with pedestrian channelization devices (per MUTCD Sections 6F.63 and 6F.71)
Section 6F.63 Channelizing Devices Function of channelizing devices for pedestrians • Visual deterrent to motorists - warn road users of conditions • Deter bicycle and pedestrian from entering work zone or road
Standard Shall be detectable to users of long canes Continuous detectable bottom and top surfaces Bottom of the bottom - no higher than 2 inches above the ground
Top of the top surface - no lower than 32 inches above the ground Guidance - smooth to optimize long-cane and hand trailing.
Section 6F.71 Longitudinal Channelizing Devices Standard Interlocked to delineate or channelize flow Shall not have gaps that allow pedestrians to stray Guidance: Channelizing devices are not considered a "traffic barrier" and additional positive protection may be necessary for high volume / high speed roadways (See Exhibit 4)
/
GAP Plan
/// 9
EXHIBIT 4: CHANNELIZING DEVICES VS TEMPORARY TRAFFIC BARRIERS Section 2D.01 Notes on Guidance: If a significant potential exists for vehicle incursions into the pedestrian path, pedestrians should be rerouted or temporary traffic barriers should be installed. _____ Y/N: Is there potential for high speed vehicle incursion on pedestrian path? (IF Yes, Follow 6F.85, below)
Section 6F.85 Temporary Traffic Barriers Standards Shall be supplemented with standard delineation, pavement markings, or channelizing devices Shall be crashworthy In order to mitigate the effect of striking the upstream end of temporary traffic barrier, the end shall be installed in accordance with AASHTO’s “Roadside Design Guide” including (flare until the end is outside the acceptable clear zone or use crashworthy end treatments)
Source: workzonesafety.org
10 /// GAP Plan /
EXHIBIT 5: DETECTABLE EDGING _____ Y/N: Are all detour elements (e.g. channelizing devices and sidewalk closed barricades) designed with detectable edging for visually impaired pedestrians? See guidance on detectable edging from MUTCD Section 6F.74 below.
Section 6F.74 Detectable Edging for Pedestrians Must be detectable by persons with visual disabilities
Guidance Continuous and firmly attached (ground or other) Should protrude – Min 6” above surface Bottom edging - Max 2.5” above surface Adjacent sections - interconnected Orange, white, or yellow and match adjacent channelizing devices
Indicate Proposed Edging Materials: Plastic or metal Sections of lumber Formed-in-place asphalt or concrete curb Prefabricated concrete curb sections Chain link or other fencing w/ continuous bottom rail Other: _________________________________________________________ NO Tape, rope, or plastic chain strung between devices!
Source: Ron W Eck, PE – NC LTAP (top) Example of Typical Pedestrian Channelizing Devices, Source: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/ article/648243 (left)
/
GAP Plan
/// 11
EXHIBIT 6: AUDIBLE DEVICES _____ Y/N: Can an individual with vision disabilities determine the detour route without a speech message sign? If no, follow guidance on audible measures per Section 6D.02 and the PROWAG below.
Section 6D.02 05 Guidance “Because printed signs and surface delineation are not usable by pedestrians with visual disabilities, blocked routes, alternate crossings, and sign and signal information should be communicated to pedestrians with visual disabilities by providing audible information devices, accessible pedestrian signals and barriers and channelizing devices that are detectable to pedestrian traveling with aid of a long cane or who have low vision.
NOTES: 1. To prevent any tripping hazard to pedestrians, ballast shall be located behind or internal to the device. Any support on the front of the device shall not extend into the 48 in. minimum walkway clear space and shall have 0.5 in. maximum height above the walkway surface with approved beveling (see note #9 on page 6K-xxxi of source document for beveling details). 2. Detectable edges for long canes shall be continuous and 6 in. min high above the walkway surface and have color or markings contrasting with the walkway surface.
Section 6D.02 (Speech Messages)
3. Devices shall not block water drainage from the walkway. A gap height or opening from the walkway surface up to 2 in. maximum height is allowed for drainage purposes.
06 Support - when channelizing devices aren’t sufficient, e.g. crossings
4. Railings or other objects may protrude a maximum of 4 in. into the walkway clear space when located 27 in. minimum above the walkway surface.
Most desirable = speech message with passive
5. Longitudinal channelizing devices for pedestrians shall be 32 in. high or greater.
pedestrian actuation
If a pushbutton is used, should be equipped with a locator tone Per the PROWAG: Audible proximity-actuated audible signs are a preferred means to warn pedestrians who are blind or have low vision about sidewalk closures.
6. When hand guidance is required, the top rail or top surface shall: be in a vertical plane perpendicular to the walkway above the detectable edge, be continuous at a height of 34 to 38 in. above the walkway surface, and be supported with minimal interference to the pedestrian's hands or fingers. 7. All devices shall be free of sharp or rough edges, and fasteners (bolts) shall be rounded to prevent harm to hands, arms or clothing of pedestrians. 8. All devices used to channelize pedestrian flow should interlock such that gaps do not allow pedestrians to stray from the channelized path. 9. Any pedestrian devices used to provide positive protection (traffic or hazard) for pedestrians or workers shall meet crashworthy requirements appropriate for the barriers’ application. 10. Barricades shall be used to close the entire width of the walkway surface. 11. A walkway surface shall be firm, stable, and slip resistant.
Source: https://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/publ/ fieldmanual/fieldmanual2014/ttcdevices.pdf
12 /// GAP Plan /
EXHIBIT 7: TEMPORARY CURB RAMPS _____ Y/N: Are temporary curb ramps provided for all relevant locations along the temporary access route? _____ Y/N: Do all temporary curb ramps meet the following requirements?
Meet 5 ADA Requirements on Width, Transitions and Turning Space Requirements (see Minnesota DOT Figures 40 and 41 below)
Provides color contrast with marked edges or detectable warning surface (DWS)
Does not buckle - support weight of peds and motorized scooters & wheelchairs
Handrails provided if ramp rise > 6” rise or ramp run > 72”
/
GAP Plan
/// 13
EXHIBIT 8: OVERHEAD ACTIVITY AND COVERED WALKWAYS _____ Y/N: Is there potential for falling debris from the construction activity? If yes see guidance on covered walkways per Section 6D.01 below.
Section 6D.01 Covered Walkways and Traffic Barriers Option: A canopied walkway may be used to protect pedestrians from falling debris. Guidance:
Sturdy Adequately lighted for nighttime use Detectable Accessible
14 /// GAP Plan /
ADA SELF-EVALUATION AND TRANSITION PLAN
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction......................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 What is the ADA Transition Plan for the Public Rights-of-Way? ......................................................................... 3 1.2 How does this plan relate to the City’s 1992 ADA Transition Plan ..................................................................... 3 2.0 Regulatory Framework and Guidance Documents............................................................................ 4 2.1 The Americans with Disabilities Act ............................................................................................................................... 4 2.2 The ADA and its Relationship to Other Laws .............................................................................................................. 4 2.3 Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) .................................................................................... 4 3.0 Public Participation Overview ............................................................................................................ 5 3.1 Requirements ......................................................................................................................................................................... 5 3.2 Public Engagement Approach and Documentation ................................................................................................. 5 4.0 City of Asheville’s Public Rights-of-Way Self-Evaluation Approach and Results ........................... 7 4.1 What is a Self-Evaluation?.................................................................................................................................................. 7 4.2 Self-Evaluation of Infrastructure in the Public Rights-of-Way .............................................................................. 7 4.2.1 Existing Infrastructure Inventory.............................................................................................................................. 7 4.2.2 Obstacles Identified ..................................................................................................................................................... 7 4.2.3 Methodology – The Corridor Approach ............................................................................................................... 8 4.2.4 Corridor Evaluation and Results ............................................................................................................................ 10 4.3 Self-Evaluation of Transportation Policies, Practices and Programs ................................................................ 12 4.3.1 Unified Development Ordinance Findings and Recommendations ......................................................... 12 4.3.2 Asheville Standards Specifications and Details Manual Findings and Recommendations .............. 12 4.3.3 ADA Public Surveys and Focus Group Findings and Recommendations ............................................... 13 4.3.4 Findings and Recommendations from City Department Meetings .......................................................... 16 4.3.5 Findings and Recommendations from External Policy Review and NCDOT Meetings ..................... 21 5.0 The City of Asheville ADA Transition Plan ....................................................................................... 22 5.1 Methods for Barrier Removal – Infrastructure .......................................................................................................... 22 5.1.1 Systematic Corridor Approach ............................................................................................................................... 22 5.1.2 Planning Level Cost Estimates ................................................................................................................................ 23 5.1.3 Corridor Implementation Schedule ...................................................................................................................... 24 5.1.4 Current Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) - ADA Transition Plan Elements ............................................. 26 5.2 Methods for Barrier Removal - Policy and Program .............................................................................................. 28 6.0 ADA Coordinator ............................................................................................................................... 30
7.0 Request and Grievance Procedure ................................................................................................... 30 8.0 Moving forward ................................................................................................................................ 31 8.1 Next Steps.............................................................................................................................................................................. 31 8.2 Plan Monitoring and Updates ........................................................................................................................................ 31 Appendix A: Self-Evaluation Findings and Corridor Details ................................................................ 33 Appendix B: Project Cost Estimates ...................................................................................................... 34 Appendix C: Grievance Procedure and ADA Notice
....................................................................... 36
Appendix D: ADA Standards.................................................................................................................. 41 Appendix E: Glossary of Terms .............................................................................................................. 43
1.0 INTRODUCTION The City of Asheville was incorporated in 1797 in the Appalachian Mountains. As the City grew so did its sidewalk and trail network. The terrain in the City is steep in many places and sidewalks were built where they were needed most. Many run alongside roads with steep grades. After the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in 1990, in the City began installing curb ramps and fitting them into the existing conditions the best they could. However, much of the City’s infrastructure in the public rights-ofway (e.g. public streets, sidewalks, road crossings and pedestrian signals, greenways, bus stops, and onstreet parking) contain barriers for individuals with disabilities. The overall goal of this ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan is to identify barriers in Asheville’s public rights-of-way and to make a plan to remove barriers so that pedestrians with disabilities can fully access all the amenities the City has to offer. This document is a supplement to Asheville’s 1992 Transition Plan.
1.1 What is the ADA Transition Plan for the Public Rights-of-Way? Many people with disabilities in our city rely on our pedestrian network as their primary, or only, way to travel. According to the 2019 American Community Survey, 12.2% of Asheville's population has some type of disability. Other sources report a greater disability presence. It is the city's responsibility to ensure that people with disabilities can move about city streets and buildings and participate in programs, services and activities without barriers. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 is a civil rights law that prohibits discrimination based on someone’s disability. Title II of the Act requires cities and towns to have a plan to make accommodations for everyone. The purpose of this ADA Transition Plan is to fulfill that requirement for the City’s public rights-of-way. The public rights-of-way include all public streets, sidewalks, road crossings and pedestrian signals, greenways, bus stops, and on-street parking. This Plan was developed as one of three parts of a larger companion planning effort referred to as Close the GAP, which included development of three plans: (G) Greenway, (A) ADA Transition, and (P) Pedestrian Plans for the City of Asheville. The requirements for the Transition Plan are dictated by Title II of the ADA (28 CFR 35.150) which requires that a City with more than 50 employees (such as Asheville) must create a Transition Plan to remove the obstacles identified in a self-evaluation. Title II of the ADA, 28 CFR 150(d)(3), includes four requirements for a transition plan: i. Identify physical obstacles in the public entity's facilities that limit the accessibility of its programs or activities to individuals with disabilities; ii. Describe in detail the methods that will be used to make the facilities accessible; iii. Specify the schedule for taking the steps necessary to achieve compliance with this section and, if the time period of the transition plan is longer than one year, identify steps that will be taken during each year of the transition period; and iv. Indicate the official responsible for implementation of the plan.
1.2 How does this plan relate to the City’s 1992 ADA Transition Plan The City created a Transition Plan in 1992 in compliance with the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). It was based on a self-evaluation of the programs and services provided at the time. Transportation is an important program provided by the City and the evaluation covered the public rights-of-way in a general sense but did not give specifics regarding removal of obstacles. This document is an update and add to the original Transition Plan and addresses access only in the public rights-of-way and does not include information on the City of Asheville’s programs, practices, or building facilities not related to public rights-of-way.
/ GAP Plan /// 3
2.0 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK AND GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS 2.1 The Americans with Disabilities Act The Americans with Disabilities Act, enacted on July 26, 1990, is a civil rights law prohibiting discrimination against individuals on the basis of disability. The ADA consists of five titles outlining protections in the following areas: I. Employment II. State and local government services III. Public accommodations IV. Telecommunications V. Miscellaneous Provisions Title II of the ADA pertains to the programs, activities and services that public entities provide. As a provider of public transportation services and programs, the City of Asheville must comply with this section of the Act as it specifically applies to public service agencies. Title II of the ADA provides that, “…no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity.” (42 USC. Sec. 12132; )
2.2 The ADA and its Relationship to Other Laws Title II of the ADA is companion legislation to two previous federal statutes and regulations: The Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 is a Federal law that requires Federal facilities be accessible when they are designed, built, altered or leased with Federal funds . The Architectural Barriers Act marks one of the first efforts to ensure access to the built environment. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 is a Federal law that protects qualified individuals from discrimination based on their disability. The nondiscrimination requirements of the law apply to employers and organizations that receive financial assistance from any Federal department or agency. Title II of the ADA extended this coverage to all state and local government entities, regardless of whether they receive federal funding or not.
2.3 Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) Even in 2022, the country is without established standards for accessibility in the public rights-of-way. The United States Access Board is developing new guidelines under the Americans with Disabilities Act, called the PROWAG, that will address access to sidewalks and streets, crosswalks, curb ramps, pedestrian signals, on-street parking, and other components of public rights-of-way. These guidelines also review shared use paths, which are designed primarily for use by bicyclists and pedestrians for transportation and recreation purposes. These guidelines must be adopted by the Department of Justice and the Department of Transportation to become enforceable standards. As such, the current enforceable standards are the 2010 ADA Standards for building sites and curb ramps. However, FHWA’s webpage on Pedestrians and Accessible Design, June 27, 2017, indicates that the proposed PROWAG represents the current “recommended best practices, and can be considered the state of the practice that could be followed for areas not fully addressed by the present ADA standards”.
/ GAP Plan /// 4
3.0 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION OVERVIEW 3.1 Requirements The City of Asheville recognizes that public participation is an important component in the development of this document. Input from the community has been gathered and used to help define priority areas for improvements within the jurisdiction of The City of Asheville. Also, as required under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and 28 CFR 35.105, when a selfevaluation is completed, “(b) A public entity shall provide an opportunity to interested persons, including individuals with disabilities or organizations representing individuals with disabilities, to participate in the selfevaluation process by submitting comments. (c) A public entity that employs 50 or more persons shall, for at least three years following completion of the self-evaluation, maintain on file and make available for public inspection: (1) A list of the interested persons consulted; (2) A description of areas examined and any problems identified; and (3) A description of any modifications made.”
3.2 Public Engagement Approach and Documentation During public input for the Close the GAP companion plan, the city hosted a series of virtual ADA focus group meetings. These small groups allowed for feedback on projects, priority corridors, as well as city policies that impact mobility for differently abled individuals moving about the City of Asheville. The dates of these focus groups were as follows: • • •
September 14, 2021 September 16, 2021 March 31, 2022
Attendees included individuals with ambulatory impairments, wheelchair users, those with vision impairments (full and partial) as well as support organizations that provide services for individuals with disabilities. A number of one-on-one conversations took place as well. In addition to ADA focus group meetings, the following public involvement activities were completed through the development of this plan. • • • • • • • • •
Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) #1 CAC Drop In Meetings Initial Public Survey #1 CAC Meeting #2 Public Meeting #1 Public Survey #2 Public Survey #3 Multimodal Transportation Commission CAC Meeting #3
January 23, 2020 January 27, 2020 October 30, 2020 - January 18, 2021 March 23, 2021 August 25 & 27, 2021 September 2021 February 14, 2022 – March 14, 2022 February 23, 2022 March 31, 2022
This document was also available for public comment. Additional details regarding the public outreach and comments are included in Section 4.0.
/ GAP Plan /// 5
Throughout ADA Transition Plan development, a concerted effort was made to expand the network with whom the City engaged to discuss ADA challenges and recommendations. The City utilized its Asheville App platform - an online tool that allows users to notify the City about issues like water line leaks, potholes, or sidewalk repairs via smartphone or computer - to generate a list of email contacts based on submissions containing tags such as “wheelchair”, “ADA”, “disability” and “handicap”. The City worked with the project’s consultant team and organizations and individuals representing the disability community to generate a dynamic contact list for the project’s ADA Focus Group meetings. For the initial ADA Transition Plan Focus Group meeting in March 2020, a contact form was developed and circulated among participants to identify additional individuals to engage during Plan development. The contact list for the ADA Focus Group meetings held on September 14th, 2021, September 16th, 2021 and March 31st, 2022 included 60 individuals representing the following: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Disability Partners Area Agency on Aging AARP Asheville-Buncombe Institute for Parity Achievement (ABIPA) ABCCM Veterans Restoration Quarters Buncombe County Veterans’ Services Disabled American Veterans IFB Solutions Community Low Vision Center Low Vision Support Group National Federation of the Blind NC Division of Services for the Blind Asheville Multimodal Transportation Commission (MMTC) MMTC Transit Committee Mountain Mobility Land of Sky FIRST WNC - FIRST Resource Center Hinds Feet Farm Buncombe County Department of Health & Human Services National Federation of the Blind LIFE House Apartments of Asheville Open Hearts Art Center Bike / Ped Task Force State Department of Health & Human Services - Orientation and Mobility Specialist NC Services for the Blind Catalyst Sports (an adaptive sports non-profit) Family members of individuals with disabilities Individuals with disabilities
/ GAP Plan /// 6
4.0 CITY OF ASHEVILLE’S PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY SELFEVALUATION APPROACH AND RESULTS 4.1 What is a Self-Evaluation? As required under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and 28 CFR 35.105, before developing the ADA Transition plan to remove barriers and obstacles, it is necessary to perform an ADA SelfEvaluation to identify those items. A Self-Evaluation includes a review of current transportation infrastructure conditions as well as transportation policies, practices and programs that impact accessibility. The following sections describe the City of Asheville's Self-Evaluation for the Public Rightsof-Way and in divided into two sections: • •
Infrastructure Self-Evaluation Programs and Practices that Impact Accessibility in the Public Rights-of-Way
4.2 Self-Evaluation of Infrastructure in the Public Rights-of-Way This section of the ADA Self-Evaluation examines the condition of the City of Asheville’s Pedestrian Circulation Route/Pedestrian Access Route (PCR/PAR) and identifies the need for infrastructure improvements. This includes the sidewalks, curb ramps, pedestrian trails, street crossings, traffic control signals, on-street parking and transit facilities that are located within the City of Asheville rights-of-way. Any barriers to accessibility identified in the self-evaluation and the remedy to the identified barrier are set out in this transition plan.
4.2.1 Existing Infrastructure Inventory This plan covers the City of Asheville, which contains: • • • • • • •
187.5 miles of sidewalk 9.06 miles of greenways and/or trails 3683 existing curb ramps and up to 500 potential missing curb ramps 146 traffic signal push buttons 42 designated accessible parking spaces 677 bus stops (58 with accessible boarding and alighting areas) 276 traffic signals (34 maintained by the City)
4.2.2 Obstacles Identified The obstacles identified related to the following facilities within the Public Rights-of-Ways: • Curb ramps • Sidewalks • Trails and greenways • Street crossings • Traffic signals • On-street parking • Bus stops The obstacles identified within these facilities relate to specific dimensions along the Pedestrian Access Routes (PARs) that do not meet ADA standards or the currently recognized “best practices” in the Proposed Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG). Examples of minimum standards that must be met for each dimension or element along the pedestrian access route (PAR) are as follows (this list is not all inclusive):
/ GAP Plan /// 7
• • • • • • •
• • •
Clear width and height (which is sometimes blocked by encroachments - or physical intrusions can include items such as utility poles, traffic signs, street furniture) Running grades (the slope in the same direction of travel) Cross slopes (the slopes across the travel path) Turning and maneuvering space (the space where a pedestrian turns directions of travel) Horizontal openings (gaps in the surface of travel, such as a gap or hole in the sidewalk) Vertical rises (obstructions that are typically bumps or lips, such as the displacement of a sidewalk panel) Detectable Warning Surfaces (DWS) and locations (also known as truncated domes, DWS is a distinctive surface pattern of domes that are detectable by a cane or underfoot to alert people of their approach to street crossings or other intersections) Traffic signal features (e.g., pedestrian signals and pushbuttons, audible messages and vibrotactile features) Parking and accessible route to parking spaces Width and length of waiting and loading areas at transit stops
4.2.3 Methodology – The Corridor Approach The most common practice for reviewing infrastructure for ADA Transition Plans and Self-Evaluations across the United States has involved a detailed identification of pedestrian obstacles by creating a full inventory of every foot of sidewalk, every curb ramp, pedestrian signal, parking space and bus stop. This includes measuring every slope and dimension. This endeavor can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars and can take multiple years to complete. It creates massive amounts of data that cities struggle to manage and many never use. On top of this, it is common for cities to determine through this process that nearly every facility in the public rights-of-way will need some sort of compliance upgrade. Frequently, up to 90% of facilities have at least one element of noncompliance. The City of Asheville, like most communities, has limited resources and competing demands for them. Because of this, the city worked with industry leaders, with input from FHWA staff, that have been conducting ADA Transition Plans for the Public Rights-of-Way based on a “corridor approach” that is based on established community priorities and refined through public input. The City of Asheville used a corridor evaluation methodology under the assumption that nearly all of the facilities in the public rights-of-way contain at least one non-compliant element with respect to standards for accessibility in the public rights-of-way. The methodology evaluates corridors, which are segments of existing segments of streets and greenways in the public rights-of-way defined by logical project beginning and end point that will scheduled to be upgraded in order of prioritization. Prior to any corridor construction or ADA work, the following systematic process will be completed: Step 1: Perform a detailed ADA assessment during project scoping which will include identifying barriers and obstacles for repair. ADA elements should be inventoried using a detailed ADA checklist that should be developed in accordance with ADA Standards and PROWAG Guidance. These elements should include the following*: o Curb ramps and crossings o Sidewalk cracks and gaps o Sidewalk cross slopes o Vertical and horizontal encroachments in the Pedestrian Access Route (PAR must be kept clear per height and width requirements) o Accessible signals and push button placement / GAP Plan /// 8
Excessive slopes at driveway openings Crossing features at roundabouts & free flowing right turns Accessible on-street parking needs Transit stop accessibility Location specific maintenance and policy needs (what is needed to keep pedestrian access route clear (e.g., future utility work, inadequate repairs, trash cans, vegetation) *This is not and exhaustive list. All construction must meet the current federal regulations to ensure that corridors are fully accessible. o o o o o
Step 2: Create and inventory of individual barriers and fully ADA compliant elements identified on the corridor. These elements should be documented and maintained on a city database with corridor assessment results and transition plan progress. Step 3: Develop a budget and scope of work for updating all non-compliant elements for each corridor to remove barriers. The budget and scope of work process should be based on the Pre-Design Checklist, as detailed in Chapter 8. Additional priority will be given to any location where an improvement project or alteration was constructed after January 26, 1991, and accessibility features were omitted. Step 4: Complete project planning, design and construction as detailed in Chapter 8 of the Close the GAP companion plan. This work will include an upgrade of non-compliant elements to the maximum extent feasible. Step 5: Remove compliant elements from the inventory of barriers. The benefits of this process, as implemented as part of the City’s Close the GAP planning process, are as follows: 1.
Moves toward implementation faster (money and time for up front measurements can be spent on implementation). 2. Allows for cross-department and interagency coordination for advanced planning of ADA corridor projects that align with other infrastructure projects. This assists with maximizes the efficiency of implementation and ADA Transition Plan. 3. Improves efficiency, as conditions along roadways deteriorate and may be in a different condition by the time any work is done. As such, detailed assessments will be current and not need to be repeated for a project that is programmed for a future year when conditions have changed. 4. This methodology develops preliminary corridor budgets based on a worst-case scenario (no compliant elements). This allows for funding flexibility in instances where facilities are found to be fully compliant. Excess budget can be shifted to the next set of priorities to continue implementation on an accelerated schedule. 5. Included a methodical approach to upgrading key pedestrian corridors throughout the city based on a thorough prioritization process. Per ADA 28 CFR 35.150(d)(2) this process considered access to “state and local government offices and facilities, transportation, places of public accommodation, and employers” among other key destinations. The prioritization methodology is described in Chapter 4 of the City’s companion planning effort and included a GIS analysis of the following factors: Destinations, Equity, Safety and Public Input. 6. Included input from community members with disabilities and considers needed corridor upgrades to remove barriers based on local needs.
/ GAP Plan /// 9
This plan enables the City to move forward with projects to make all of their pedestrian infrastructure accessible by identifying the areas with the highest needs, the greatest use, and making those improvements in order of priority.
4.2.4 Corridor Evaluation and Results ADA Priority Corridors were developed as follows:
Step 1: Corridor Prioritization - Round 1 As described in Chapter 4 of the Close the GAP companion plan, this corridor prioritization methodology scored streets in the city to determine the areas of greatest need based on the combination of three scores: destination + equity, safety and connectivity
Step 2: Corridor Prioritization - Round 2 (Public Feedback) In order to account for public concerns and reported issues with the pedestrian network, corridors were assigned public input scores based on input received during the initial Broad Community Feedback Surveys in January 2021 and the Project Network Survey in the Fall of 2021, as described in Chapter 3 of the Close the GAP companion plan.
Step 3: Final Project Lists by Category After the corridor scoring was completed, roadways that scored more than 10 points (maximum score of 20 points) were further divided into two priority* project lists based on roadway maintenance and ownership. These categories were developed to assist with identifying project development, funding partnerships and coordination needs. The results from this analysis are presented in Appendix A. North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Roadways o Priority ADA Project Groups 1- 9* (See Appendix A). City of Asheville (COA) Roadways o Priority ADA Project Groups 1-5* (See Appendix A) *All existing pedestrian facilities are included in this ADA Transition plan database as future corridors for barrier removal. Corridors not scheduled for barrier removal in Years 1-15 (Appendix A list) will be prioritized during year 10 through an ADA Transition Plan update, for barrier removal completion in Years 15-40 as noted in Table 2.
Step 4. Project Development & Recommendations After the public vetted the priority network, the team compiled project lists and evaluated each corridor to determine needed ADA and pedestrian improvements. From that review, each corridor received a project description and recommendations. The corridor evaluation and project development details are available in table format in Appendix A. For projects that have a combination of ADA Transition Plan elements (e.g., existing sidewalks and ramps) and Pedestrian Plan elements (e.g., sidewalk gaps and new crossings), the project descriptions were combined. This will allow for development of a complete project as each corridor is advanced into implementation. Even if these improvements are phased (not completed at the same time or under one project), a completed corridor requires implementation of both missing connections as well as upgrading existing facilities in order to ensure accessibility for all users. The database contains the following information: • • •
Funding and project development status Recommended next step for implementation Prioritization next steps, where applicable / GAP Plan /// 10
• •
An ADA conditions scan Order of magnitude cost estimates
More on the ADA Conditions Scan For each corridor, the team completed a desktop scan to identify existing condition information available through published maps, photos, local knowledge and geographic information system (GIS) databases. These reviews included an initial “high level” assessment that indicates the prevalence and severity of accessibility barriers within each Pedestrian Access Route (PAR) including transit stops, parking and signals. This rating database will be updated as corridors are fully assessed during the planning and scoping phase and then updated again as projects are completed and documented as ADA compliant, thus allowing the barriers to be removed from the ADA Transition Plan. The ratings are as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Fully compliant. Good condition: needs compliance review to verify. Fair condition: needs ADA upgrades in spots (specific locations). Moderate condition: needs many ADA upgrades. Poor condition: needs significant ADA upgrades (full sidewalk reconstruction for much of the corridor).
Note that no corridors were assigned a rating of 1 (fully compliant) since corridor assessments have not been completed and all corridors remain on the Transition Plan. The rating system was used to determine cost estimates for the ADA Transition Plan steps and implementation schedule. The City can use these ratings as a tool when deciding which corridors to program during regular cycles of capital project programming. For example, when a list of ADA projects is considered for an upcoming capital improvement cycle and one is a high priority corridor with a condition rating of 2 (Good Condition), it may be shifted down on the project list to accommodate a slightly lower priority project with a conditions rating of 5 (Poor Condition).
Step 5. Public Input Round 3 The city collected a final round of public input in March 2022 which included an online survey and ADA focus group meetings. Additionally, the Think Tank Team and Citizens Advisory Committee met one final time which involved various city departments, NCDOT and Buncombe County representatives.
More on ADA Focus Group Feedback and Priorities As described in Section 3.0, the city hosted a series of virtual ADA focus group meetings. These small groups allowed for feedback on projects, priority corridors, as well as city policies that impact mobility for differently abled individuals moving about the City of Asheville. Although a few specific corridors were cited during Focus Group meetings, much of the discussion centered around key maintenance and policy issues that result in obstacles along the Pedestrian Access Routes (PARs) in the city. More details and recommendations on policy and maintenance items are included in Section 4.3. ADA focus group attendees and ADA survey participants mentioned several key corridors in need of ADA upgrades. The top mentioned corridors are as follows (in order of most mentioned): 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Merrimon Avenue, from downtown to Beaver Lake. Haywood Road from the French Broad River to Patton Avenue (through West Asheville). Broadway Street (north of I-240), between downtown and WT Weaver Boulevard. Tunnel Road, from downtown to the City limits. Amboy Road, from Carrier Park to Meadow Road. / GAP Plan /// 11
6. Fairview Road, from Biltmore Village to Swannanoa River Road. 7. Kenilworth Road, spot missing sidewalks and barriers.
4.3 Self-Evaluation of Transportation Policies, Practices and Programs This self-evaluation identified what city policies and practices impact accessibility and examined how the City of Asheville implements these policies. Policies and practices are the standards, guidance and steps that the city follows to guide decisions and projects; while often invisible to the public, they are critical to how the public experiences the rights-of-way. This step identified obstacles or barriers in City of Asheville's policies and practices. The goal is to develop a plan to provide accessibility and allow for full participation of individuals with disabilities. As part of this self-evaluation, the following tasks and reviews were completed: 1.
Review of the City of Asheville’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) sections related to accessibility. 2. Review of the City of Asheville’s Standards Specifications and Details Manual (ASSDM) sections related to accessibility. 3. ADA related public surveys and focus groups to discuss policies and practices. 4. City department meetings were held to gather and review current policies and practices related to overseeing implementation and maintenance of the public rights-of-way in the City of Asheville. 5. NCDOT meetings were held to gather and review current policies and practices related to overseeing implementation and maintenance of the public rights-of-way in the City of Asheville. The following sections summarize the results of this self-evaluation and the policies and procedural challenges that impact delivery of fully ADA compliant pedestrian facilities in the public rights-of-way.
4.3.1 Unified Development Ordinance Findings and Recommendations The City of Asheville’s UDO is a document that contains regulations that apply to different types of land uses, development, and other regulations. For example, the UDO includes chapters such as Development, Historic Preservation, and Nuisances. In general, the UDO communicates the expectations of the city as it relates to development projects and activities. For example, the UDO requires new sidewalk when someone develops a new multi-family residential development with 10 or more units. The planning team conducted an in-depth review of Asheville’s UDO to identify standards that promote, could be changed to improve, or hinder accessibility. The review noted recommended changes to and identified gaps in UDO language. The detailed UDO review and recommendations results are included in Appendix 12 of the Close the GAP companion plan. Key UDO recommendations that have the greatest impact on pedestrian accessibility in the city have been included in a set of comprehensive Action Items that are listed in Section 5.2, Table 4.
4.3.2 Asheville Standards Specifications and Details Manual Findings and Recommendations The ASSDM outlines how to construct facilities in the public rights-of-way and includes standards for the Pedestrian Access Route (PAR). For example, the ASSDM contains curb ramp, sidewalk and driveway apron details that meet ADA requirements. These policy and design standards are used to determine such factors as: • • •
Accessibility standards - ADA compliance for ramps, sidewalks, crossings, greenways Accessibility standards for transit stops and on-street parking Facility selection: shared or separated facilities (sidewalk, greenway, bike lanes etc.) / GAP Plan /// 12
• • • • • • • • •
Facility width Separation (or buffer) from traffic or features such as streams and steep slopes Need for facilities on one or both sides of the street Pedestrian crossing spacing and treatments Transit stop amenities Lighting requirements and standards Temporary traffic control (work zone accommodations for bicycle and pedestrians) Trail crossing design (e.g., sight distance, markings and signage) Pedestrian signal standards (including audible pedestrian signal (APS) needs)
The detailed ASSDM review and recommendations results are included in Appendix 12 of the Close the GAP companion plan. Key ASSDM recommendations that have the greatest impact on pedestrian accessibility in the city have been included in a set of comprehensive Action Items that are listed in Section 5.2, Table 4.
4.3.3 ADA Public Surveys and Focus Group Findings and Recommendations During the Close the GAP Plan, the city hosted a series of virtual ADA focus group meetings. These small groups allowed for feedback on projects, priority corridors, as well as city policies that impact mobility for differently abled individuals moving about the City of Asheville. Several one-on-one conversations took place as well. Attendees included individuals with ambulatory impairments, wheelchair users, those with vision impairments (full and partial) as well as support organizations that provide services for individuals with disabilities. During Focus Group meetings, much of the discussion centered around key maintenance and policy issues that result in obstacles along the Pedestrian Access Routes (PARs) in the city. Group feedback related to types of facilities that are desired as well as key maintenance and policy issues that are summarized on the following two pages. More details and recommendations related to this feedback is included in the following Exhibit 1 and 2. Exhibit 1: ADA Focus Group Priorities for Facilities and Design Items (pg 14) Exhibit 2: ADA Focus Group Priorities for Maintenance and Policy Items (pg 15)
/ GAP Plan /// 13
/ GAP Plan /// 14
/ GAP Plan /// 15
4.3.4 Findings and Recommendations from City Department Meetings The following targeted work sessions were held with various city departments that are responsible for overseeing implementation and maintenance of Greenway, ADA and Pedestrian projects in the City of Asheville. The following 4 focus group meetings were held: 1. 2. 3. 4.
Transportation Department Public Works and Streets Departments Planning and Development Services Departments Capital Projects
During the meetings, the planning team covered a series of questions and discussion topics as indicated in Exhibit 3: Targeted Focus Group Session Structure. The summary of findings and recommendations from these meetings is shown in Exhibit 4. Many of the Findings and Recommendations relate to ADA compliance and are included in final ADA Transition Plan methods for barrier removal which are included in Section 5.2, Table 4.
Exhibit 3: Department Meeting Session Structure
/ GAP Plan /// 16
Exhibit 4: Department Meetings Findings and Recommendations Targeted Focus Groups: Identified Needs by Category
Recommendation
Action Type
Project Selection & Prioritization Needs Funding flexibility for emergency projects and partner matching (grants).
Consider funding set aside for emergency and grant/partnership opportunities.
Funding Investment
Public facing database with city responses to community sidewalk and ADA related requests (Asheville App and other community requests).
Update Asheville App (or similar) where records, city responses, and actions taken are visible to the public.
Policy/Program Development
Need for more funding to support project implementation
See Close the GAP Chapters 6 and 8 for detailed recommendations related to ADA projects.
Funding Investment
Project Scoping and ROW Needs Project scope and final budget set with insufficient preliminary engineering and there is a need for contingency or flexibility in scope to address unknown budget issues.
See recommended project implementation process in Close the GAP Chapter 8.
Capital Project Planning Policy
Challenges with rights-of-way acquisition that delay sidewalk and greenway projects, and limit ADA compliance. For example, more ADA ramps will be technically infeasible or result in undesirable corner ramps if rights-of-way is not secured earlier in the process.
See recommended project implementation process in Close the GAP Chapter 8.
Capital Project Planning Policy
Limited resurfacing budgets and scoping result in missed opportunities to include funding for ADA work, complete streets components such as parking spaces, bike lanes.
In order to better address ADA compliance during resurfacing (to include full ADA upgrades that may require right-of-way), look to plan ahead to integrate and coordinate overlapping ADA transition plan and Capital Projects along planned resurfacing routes.
Capital Project Planning Policy and Funding Investment
Design Standards, UDO and Policy
Need updated ADA design standards and review requirements, including driveways.
Update city ADA ramp details and relevant design standards to reflect proposed Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG). See detailed recommendations included in the review of Asheville’s Standard Specifications and Details Manual (ASSDM) in Appendix 12 of the Close the GAP companion plan.
Policy/Program Development
/ GAP Plan /// 17
Targeted Focus Groups: Identified Needs by Category
Recommendation
Action Type
Modify development and transportation design and review process to require an ADA checklist and approval by designated ADA specialist. Designs should include detailed elevations with ADA measurements. Develop and require technical infeasibility forms (TIFs) for instances where full ADA compliance is not feasible within the scope of work. These forms should be kept on file or uploaded into a GIS database. Designing for a 2% cross slope often results in noncompliant ramps because designing for the maximum does not allow for construction tolerances (variations).
Modify design standards to less than maximum, for example, 1.5% cross slope vs max 2% to allow for construction tolerances (variations).
Policy/Program Development
Need for ADA on-street parking standards.
Update parking space design and requirements in the ASSDM to reflect proposed PROWAG details.
Policy/Program Development
Updates needed on details for transit stop accessibility.
Update standard ADA details for bus stops. See ASSDM recommendations table.
Policy/Program Development
Update temporary street closure (construction and events) process (see Close the GAP Accompanying Document: Pedestrian Accommodations in Work Zones Design Guidance and Checklist for more details).
Frequent issues with inadequate access through work zones and temporary sidewalk closures.
Require a detour design and approval submission for any sidewalk or curb ramp closure and review to ensure detour is in compliance with the MUTCD requirements and proposed PROWAG.
Policy/Program Development
Consider certification process for selected contractors. Provide contractor resources on city website with typical applications and best practices. Consider implementing/revising enforcement / violation fee structure
Need for lighting requirements / standards for sidewalks, crossings and greenways.
Develop a sustainable street light policy and program to address lighting best practices in locations of high pedestrian usage and at pedestrian crossing locations. See example programs in the UDO and
Policy/Program Development
/ GAP Plan /// 18
Targeted Focus Groups: Identified Needs by Category
Recommendation
Action Type
ASSDM recommendations tables (Appendix 12 of the Close the GAP companion plan). Enforcement for full ADA compliance for impacted facilities during utility repair work.
Addressed in UDO and ASSDM recommendations.
Enforcement
Lack of greenway details and specifications.
Addressed in Chapter 5 and UDO and ASSDM recommendations.
Policy/Program Development
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION Evaluate development review staff capacity with respect to ADA Transition Plan recommendations. Develop staff ADA review training program.
Develop review capacity and training.
Consider hiring an ADA review specialist, either internal or contracted.
With project partners, there is a need for additional ADA knowledge design and construction.
Policy/Program Development Staff Development
Consider ADA certification for contractors selected on city projects. Certification possibilities include design, construction, inspectors, and work zone traffic control. Provide regular training.
Policy/Program Development
Provide best practices resources on website. Include flexibility and advanced planning time for greenway alignments through large parcels.
Challenges planning for greenway alignments through undeveloped parcels.
Continue to work with developments through existing density and parking bonus process for voluntary completion of greenway connections.
Policy/Program Development
Consider arrangements to match funds from development greenway easement donations to complete longer stretches of greenway with other grant funding sources.
OTHER ADA COMPLIANCE CHALLENGES Maintenance of sufficient Pedestrian Access Route (PAR) width Competing public space elements, such as trash cans, snow, utilities, trees, parking meters, etc.
Create rapid response program to enforce clearing of encroachments (trash cans, vegetation, signs, snow removal etc). Permanent obstructions such as utility poles/parking meters are covered in the UDO/ASSDM review in Appendix 12 of the Close the GAP companion plan.
Policy/Program Development
/ GAP Plan /// 19
Targeted Focus Groups: Identified Needs by Category
Recommendation
Infeasible curb ramps require consistent database to track ADA Transition Plan and document infeasibility.
Develop a technical infeasibility form (TIF) and related submission and approval process. Develop a process for citywide tracking / database to maintain an updated list of curb ramps on transition plan. Apply consistently for city, NCDOT and private projects.
Action Type
Policy/Program Development
1. Complete a City-wide ADA parking assessment to ensure that PROWAG requirements for the number of ADA spaces and accessibility elements are provided. Accessible parking requests process/policy.
Policy/Program Development
2. Include ADA parking requirements during resurfacing projects. 3. Develop a publicly accessible parking space request policy, program and website.
Inconsistent inspection and enforcement of noncompliant or missing* curb ramps.
1. Update curb ramp inspection form to include all accessibility requirements (see best practice examples in the ASSDM review in Appendix 12 of the Close the GAP companion plan). 2. Coordinate with NCDOT inspection forms for NCDOT streets. Establish a consistent form if possible. 3. Consider ADA certification process and training for contractors selected on city projects.
*Missing curb ramps include locations at intersections where legal unmarked crosswalks exist, including T intersections.
Policy/Program Development
4. Provide best practices resources on website, such as calibration of levels, pre-pour elevation checks, concrete finishing. 5. Ensure newly constructed curb ramps and other pedestrian elements are compliant prior to accepting projects and closing out contracts.
Complaint process and tracking that is clear and consistent.
Ensure all departments are contacting the official ADA coordinator for any ADA complaint or grievance tracking and outcome documentation. See ADA Transition Plan in Appendix C for official grievance procedure.
Policy/Program Development
Accessible meetings and special accommodations for public meetings (need policy and process).
Develop/update meeting location checklists for ADA compliance.
Policy/Program Development
Need for official sidewalk maintenance plan document and associated policy.
Consider adopting a maintenance scan and repair process at regular intervals.
Policy/Program Development
/ GAP Plan /// 20
4.3.5 Findings and Recommendations from External Policy Review and NCDOT Meetings NCDOT is an important partner in the city’s walkability efforts. There are many NCDOT policies that apply to accessibility in the public rights-of-way. Similar to the City department meetings, the team met with NCDOT representatives to discuss design standards and policies that impact the implementation and maintenance of Greenways, ADA and Pedestrian facilities within the city. The following NCDOT policy and procedural items were identified during the Close the GAP process as having the greatest impact on the city’s ability to achieve an accessible transportation network. These priority items and recommendations will require ongoing coordination between the city and NCDOT: 1.
Current NCDOT policy dictates that street repaving projects must include intersection ramp upgrades where the pedestrian access route is modified during repaving. However, this does not address non-compliant Pedestrian Access Routes (PARs) at driveway aprons and mid-block sidewalk sections. Although this is standard resurfacing practice in most jurisdictions, the result is a missed opportunity for fully accessible corridors along the most high priority routes in the city (see Chapter 4 for more info on prioritization factors). During NCDOT coordination meetings, participants identified an opportunity to seek additional funding and initiate an early planning and coordination process between the city and NCDOT to combine funding with future resurfacing work to better achieve full corridor compliance. Combining this work is more cost and time efficient than completing this work as separate projects, and offers the best outcome for the traveling public. This process can help to maximize the results achieved with each transportation investment. 2. NCDOT resurfacing policy and budgets include intersection curb ramp upgrades but do not include signal equipment modifications. Ideally, curb ramps and signal push buttons should be updated at the same time to maximize ADA compliance and to allow for better designs (2 ramps per corner) and also allow for audible pedestrian signals (APS). As a result of this practice, when intersection curb ramps are upgraded during resurfacing projects, they may not be located in ADA compliant locations relative to signal equipment and the opportunity to provide much needed push buttons is missed. Another negative outcome may result where ramp configurations are not placed in line with signal equipment (e.g., maintaining corner ramps instead of providing one ramp per crossing with a push button). During joint meetings with city and NCDOT staff, the consensus was that additional funding will need to be pursued as a solution to this issue. 3. The NCDOT policy for audible pedestrian signal requests and limited funding are an identified barrier to expanding the APS system in the City of Asheville to meet PROWAG compliance, which requires APS to assist pedestrians with visual impairments. 4. During Close the GAP related ADA focus group meetings, public engagement surveys and field observations, it was noted that work zone traffic control on city and NCDOT roadways has not consistently maintained accessible routes, per MUTCD standards, during construction. This is a key finding that is impacting mobility throughout the city and further coordination between NCDOT and the city is needed. See Close the GAP Accompanying Document: Pedestrian Accommodations in Work Zones Design Guidance and Checklist for information on temporary traffic control accessibility guidance.
/ GAP Plan /// 21
5.0 THE CITY OF ASHEVILLE ADA TRANSITION PLAN Many of the sidewalks, trails and greenways, curb ramps, street crossings, pedestrian signals, parking and bus stops were installed prior to a standard, or specific expectation of accessibility. Those constructed with the benefit of the ADA Standards and best practice guidance were not always given the scrutiny required to meet the rigorous requirements for access. The City of Asheville is committed to eliminating accessibility barriers for individuals with disabilities within its public rights-of-way. As required under 28 CFR 35.150(d)(3), the City must specify a schedule for taking necessary steps to achieve ADA compliance. An implementation plan and schedule provide a timeline for addressing deficiencies in policies and procedures, augmenting missing or incomplete inventory data, and remediating physical barriers identified through inventory. Section 5.1 below, addresses the infrastructure barrier removal, while Section 5.2 addresses policies and procedures.
5.1 Methods for Barrier Removal – Infrastructure The City of Asheville performs traditional infrastructure management similar to all cities. They are responsible for the condition of the street and sidewalk systems, traffic signals, parking and bus stops. They manage the development and redevelopment throughout the city, utilities in the rights-of-way and operations occurring under permit. Many of these activities impact the pedestrian infrastructure. These activities will continue and will be a large factor in the removal of pedestrian barriers. These methods are described below: i. ii. iii. iv. v.
Street resurfacing is required for regular maintenance and alters the rights-of-way. Curb ramps are upgraded during resurfacing. City capital projects, which have a larger scale, often incorporate the improvement of sidewalks, curb ramps, signals, parking and bus stops on projects as identified in their scope. NCDOT projects, often incorporate the improvement of sidewalks, curb ramps, signals, parking and bus stops on projects as identified in their scope. Developer activity occurs throughout the City and developers are required to improve pedestrian facilities accessing the development. Utilities and other work done under a permit often result in alterations to the public rights-ofway and the City will have oversight to ensure that to the extent feasible, the work complies with accessibility requirements.
5.1.1 Systematic Corridor Approach In order to maximize the results and timeline to upgrade the public rights-of-way through all the methods described above, a corridor methodology was developed. As detailed Section 4.2 of the Self-Evaluation, the City of Asheville has identified specific corridors as priority areas for planned accessibility improvement projects. These areas have been selected due to their proximity destinations (e.g. specific land uses such as schools, government offices and medical facilities), equity factors, safety, connectivity and receipt of public comments. Each of the corridors identified in this ADA Transition plan, will be scheduled for ADA detailed inventory and upgrade and will be incorporated into the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) as determined by The City of Asheville staff. These corridors will also be considered during project planning and programming for resurfacing, capital projects, NCDOT projects, developer activity other maintenance and utility type work. This cross coordination will optimize the delivery of an accessible network. When a corridor arrives on the annual plan to be addressed, the city’s first task will be to perform a detailed ADA assessment and develop a project scope of work. The following 4 steps will be followed on each project to ensure progress on the plan. / GAP Plan /// 22
Step 1: Perform a detailed ADA assessment during project scoping which will include identifying barriers and obstacles for repair. ADA elements should be inventoried using a detailed ADA checklist that should be developed in accordance with ADA Standards and PROWAG Guidance. These elements should include the following*: o Curb ramps and crossings o Sidewalk cracks and gaps o Sidewalk cross slopes o Vertical and horizontal encroachments in the Pedestrian Access Route (PAR must be kept clear per height and width requirements) o Accessible signals and push button placement o Excessive slopes at driveway openings o Crossing features at roundabouts & free flowing right turns o Accessible on-street parking needs o Transit stop accessibility o Location specific maintenance and policy needs (what is needed to keep pedestrian access route clear (e.g., future utility work, inadequate repairs, trash cans, vegetation) *This is not and exhaustive list. All construction must meet the current federal regulations to ensure that corridors are fully accessible. Step 2: Create and inventory of individual barriers and fully ADA compliant elements identified on the corridor. These elements should be documented and maintained on a city database with corridor assessment results and transition plan progress. Step 3: Develop a budget and scope of work for updating all non-compliant elements for each corridor to remove barriers. The budget and scope of work process should be based on the Pre-Design Checklist, as detailed in Chapter 8. Additional priority will be given to any location where an improvement project or alteration was constructed after January 26, 1991, and accessibility features were omitted. Step 4: Complete project planning, design and construction as detailed in Chapter 8 of the Close the GAP companion plan. This work will include an upgrade of non-compliant elements to the maximum extent feasible. Step 5: Remove compliant elements from the inventory of barriers. Because of the widely assumed non-compliance of the pedestrian network, budgets and project scopes will be fluid. As projects are prepared for planning, budgeting and design through the proposed corridor evaluation process, individual elements will be evaluated for ADA compliance. Planned projects, on further evaluation, may be increased or reduced in scope, or the budget may change, to account for more or fewer improvements. Barriers will be removed through alterations and project implementation and compliant elements will be removed from the Transition Plan.
5.1.2 Planning Level Cost Estimates Based on the results of the self-evaluation, the estimate costs associated with providing ADA accessibility within the entire jurisdiction for City maintained facilities is $101,274,000*, as detailed in Table 1. This amount signifies a significant investment that The City of Asheville is committed to making in the upcoming years. It is not feasible to immediately remove all barriers to access at one time. As such, an approximate annual cost breakdown will be utilized by the City as a planning tool for determining future annual funding needs and sources. As noted in Table 1 funding and implementation footnotes, sources for future funding will vary and will included a continuation of ongoing capital planning, maintenance and resurfacing programs as well as new corridor projects with a variety of potential funding sources and partnerships. The final order and schedule of implementation will require flexibility in order to accommodate new community / GAP Plan /// 23
requests or petitions for reasonable modification from person with disabilities as well as new and varying funding opportunities and annual capital programming constraints. Table 1: Planning Level Cost Estimates Accessibility Element - City Public Rights-of-Way
Estimated Cost
(1)
(Rounded Up to Nearest $1,000)
Sidewalk Repair Assume 50% (94 miles) of Sidewalks need Replacement
$68,244,000
Curb Ramp Upgrades Assume Upgrade for 90% of Curb Ramps
$27,846,000
Signalized Intersections – Push Button and Ped Signals to Accompany Curb Ramp Upgrades Assume 100% of City Maintained Traffic Signals (20 signals)
$1,680,000
Greenway Upgrades and ADA Retrofits Assume 25% (2.3 miles) of Greenway will Require Barrier Removal for ADA Compliance (Intersection ramps included in ADA curb ramp database)
$2,672,000
Transit Stops Assume 619 Existing Stops Require 8’x5’ Accessible Boarding and Alighting Areas Total
$832,000 $101,274,000
(1) Cost Estimate Notes: • Costs were developed based on the methodology outlined in Appendix B. • 30% Added to Construction Costs for Engineering and Survey (Except for Sidewalk and Greenway Replacement / Maintenance Work) • 40% Continency Added to Engineering/Survey and Construction Given High Level Planning Costs (10% for Simple Sidewalk and Greenway Replacement / Maintenance Work) • Table 1 does not include costs associated with Pedestrian or Traffic Studies, Right-of-Way Acquisition or Easements, Curb and Gutter (Beyond Ramps), Retaining Walls, Tree Impact Evaluations, Utility Adjustments, Drainage Design/Improvements, Work Zone Traffic Control (Beyond Typical Applications) or Construction Inspection. These items will have significant impact on corridor upgrade cost estimates; therefore, preliminary engineering and estimates should be conducted prior to setting project budgets and limits of work, see Chapter 8 of the Close the GAP companion plan for more information on project scoping.
5.1.3 Corridor Implementation Schedule The City of Asheville has set the following schedule goals for improving the accessibility of its pedestrian facilities within the City of Asheville’s public rights-of-way: • • • •
After 10 years, 25% of accessibility features will be ADA compliant to the maximum extent feasible. After 20 years, 50% of accessibility features will be ADA compliant to the maximum extent feasible. After 30 years, 75% of accessibility features will be ADA compliant to the maximum extent feasible. After 40 years, 100% of accessibility features will be ADA compliant to the maximum extent feasible.
/ GAP Plan /// 24
Table 2: Yearly Implementation Schedule – Infrastructure by Corridor Corridor Projects
Initiate Corridor Planning and Budgeting
Completion of Barrier Removal Target
NCDOT Group 1 & 2 Corridors COA Group 1 & 2 Corridors
Years 1 & 2
Years 2 -10
NCDOT Group 3 Corridors COA Group 3 Corridors
Years 3 & 4
Years 4 -15
NCDOT Group 4 Corridors COA Group 4 Corridors
Years 4 & 5
Years 5-15
NCDOT Group 5 Corridors COA Group 5 Corridors
Years 6 & 7
Years 7-15
NCDOT Group 6, 7 & 8 Corridors
Years 8, 9 & 10
Years 10-20
Prioritize Remaining* Work in City – Update ADA Transition Plan
Year 10-15
Years 15-40
*All existing pedestrian facilities are included in this ADA Transition plan database as future corridors for barrier removal. Corridors not scheduled for barrier removal in Years 1-15 (Appendix A list) will be prioritized during year 10 through an ADA Transition Plan update, for barrier removal completion in Years 15-40. In addition to these projects, ADA upgrades will be accomplished through the following methods. • •
• •
• •
Grants and Partnerships will be pursued in order to maximize local funding investments. NCDOT projects, ADA upgrades implemented through NCDOT STIP or Resurfacing Projects. These projects often incorporate the improvement of sidewalks, curb ramps, signals, parking and bus stops on projects as identified in their scope. Private development projects are often required to fix existing sidewalks and ramps and will be tracked as well. Utilities and other work done under a permit often result in alterations to the public rights-ofway and the City will have oversight to ensure that to the extent feasible, the work complies with accessibility requirements. Street resurfacing is required for regular maintenance and alters the rights-of-way. Curb ramps are upgraded during resurfacing. Annual Investments for Ongoing City Operations in the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) (See Table 3 for most recent CIP): Includes Bond Projects, ADA and Sidewalk Repair Budget Line Items, often 10% of Resurfacing Budgets and 10% of Capital Transportation Projects.
While the City of Asheville intends to complete the system upgrades as stated, the schedule may fluctuate based on resources. For example, the 2020 Pandemic has had an unforeseen impact on available resources. Similar strains or an inflow of funding may occur in the future. Sources of Supplemental Funding May Include: Future Transportation Grants, Increased Resurfacing Budgets, Additional Budget Line-Item Allocations, etc. / GAP Plan /// 25
5.1.4 Current Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) - ADA Transition Plan Elements Table 3, below, shows a projection of the planned ADA Transition Plan related barrier removal projects that have already be scheduled for the next 5 years, per the City’s most recently approved Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). With the adoption of this ADA Transition Plan, CIP modifications in future years are necessary to align the CIP with the findings of this ADA Transition Plan. • As noted in previous sections, sources for future funding will vary and will included a continuation of ongoing capital planning, maintenance and resurfacing programs as well as new corridor projects with a variety of potential funding sources and partnerships. • Sources of supplemental funding will be necessary and may include federal transportation grants/reimbursement programs. increased resurfacing budgets, ADA budget line-item allocations for corridor development, etc. • The final order and schedule of implementation will require flexibility in order to accommodate new community requests or petitions for reasonable modification from person with disabilities as well as new and varying funding opportunities (including grant applications) and annual capital programming constraints. Table 3: ADA Related Project Schedule: Current 5-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
Year
Project Name & ADA Work Description
Estimated Value of ADA Upgrades(1) (Rounded Up to Nearest $10,000)
Vermont Avenue: ADA Improvements - Sidewalk Project Sulfer Springs: ADA Improvements - Stormwater Project St. Anne Street Stormwater: ADA Improvements - Stormwater Project Haywood Road: ADA Improvements - Roadway Project Year 1 2023
Swannanoa Greenway: ADA Improvements - Greenway Project Merrimon Avenue (NCDOT Project): ADA Improvements - Roadway Project
$3,800,000
Annual Resurfacing Fund (2) Annual ADA and Sidewalk Funds (3) Estimated Annual NCDOT Ramp Work
(4)
Pedestrian Plan Project (5) Greenway Connector Project - ADA Improvements - Roadway Project Nasty Branch Greenway - ADA Improvements - Greenway Project Coxe Avenue - ADA ADA Improvements - Roadway Project Year 2 2024
Annual Resurfacing Fund (2)
$2,500,000
Annual ADA and Sidewalk Funds (3) Estimated Annual NCDOT Ramp Work (4) Pedestrian Plan Project (5)
/ GAP Plan /// 26
Pedestrian School Zone Safety Annual Resurfacing Fund (2) Year 3 2025
Annual ADA and Sidewalk Funds (3)
$1,200,000
Estimated Annual NCDOT Ramp Work (4) Pedestrian Plan Project (5) Annual Resurfacing Fund (2)
Year 4 2026
Annual ADA and Sidewalk Funds (3) Estimated Annual NCDOT Ramp Work (4)
$837,000
Pedestrian Plan Project (5) Livingston Complete Street - ADA Improvements - Roadway Project Deaverview Sidewalks - ADA Improvements - Sidewalk Project Greenway Connector Project - ADA Improvements - Greenway Project Nasty Branch Greenway - ADA Improvements - Greenway Project Year 5 2027
Coxe Avenue - ADA Improvements - Roadway Project
$1,550,000
Annual Resurfacing Fund (2) Annual ADA and Sidewalk Funds (3) Estimated Annual NCDOT Ramp Work (4) Pedestrian Plan Project (5)
(1) Estimated cost of ADA upgrades to remove barriers on existing pedestrian facilities within the Public Right-of-Way (2) Annual Resurfacing Funds include ADA upgrades averaging 10% of project costs. (3) NCDOT Resurfacing Funds include ADA upgrades, average of 10 ADA ramp upgrades per year. (4) Annual Sidewalk Fund: Includes some barrier removal, estimated at 10% of Sidewalk Funds. (5) Pedestrian Plan Project is allocated funds for projects that will be identified from the GAP prioritization lists.
/ GAP Plan /// 27
5.2 Methods for Barrier Removal - Policy and Program Section 4.3 of the Self-Evaluation included a review and recommendation of programs and policies that impact accessibility within the City’s public rights-of-way. The following table indicates the following methods and schedule for removing existing barriers in policy and programs related to the public rights-of-way and to ensure that future pedestrian facilities are compliant to the maximum extent feasible. Table 4: Implementation Schedule – Policy and Program Method ID #
Details
Schedule (Target Date)
1
Develop ADA Design Checklist and Submission Requirements.
Year 1
2
Update Asheville App (or similar) where records, city responses, and actions taken are visible to the public.
Year 1
3
Update the Asheville Standards Specifications and Details Manual (ASSDM). See Appendix 12 of the Close the GAP companion plan for detailed update needs.
Year 1
4
Update the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). See Appendix 12 of the Close the GAP companion plan for detailed update needs.
5
Develop a GIS process for tracking ADA Transition plan and documenting ramp compliance for corridor work, including design checklist, inspection form and Technically Infeasible Forms (TIFs)
6
Develop official sidewalk maintenance plan document and associated policy. Develop a schedule for a maintenance scan and repair process at regular intervals
7
Develop checklist for accessible meetings and special accommodations for public meetings (need policy and process). Include internal process and funding for sign language interpreters and other accommodations request.
Year 1
8
Develop interdepartmental “ADA grievance” and request database
Year 1
9
Develop a publicly accessible parking space request policy, program and website.
Year 1
10
In order to better address ADA compliance during resurfacing (to include full ADA upgrades that may require right-of-way), develop a process for advanced project planning to integrate and coordinate overlapping ADA transition plan and Capital Projects along planned resurfacing routes.
Year 1-5
11
Develop systematic rights-of-way process to maximize ability to achieve ADA compliance.
Year 1-5
12
Develop ADA Training Programs and Requirements for:
Year 1-5
• • •
Year 1-5
Year 1
Year 1-5
Designers, reviewers, field inspectors, consultants and contractors Technical Infeasibility Form training Work Zone Traffic Control for designers, reviewers and field inspectors
13
Develop, adopt and require Technically Infeasible Forms for ADA Design and Inspection.
Year 1
14
Keep it Clear Sidewalk Policy and Campaign: Create rapid response program and campaign to enforce clearing of encroachments (trash cans, vegetation, signs, snow removal etc).
15
Implement Work Zone Traffic Control guidance per the Close the GAP Accompanying Document: Pedestrian Accommodations in Work Zones Design Guidance and Checklist.
Year 1-5
Year 1
/ GAP Plan /// 28
16
Explore Franchise Agreement with utility companies to address work that impacts accessibility within the public rights-of-way
Year 1-5
17
Seek matching funding for NCDOT resurfacing projects in order to upgrade entire Pedestrian Access Route (PAR) vs intersection curb ramps.
Ongoing
18
Update City policy on closing curb ramps to reflect the FHWA Guidance – See Appendix D for more information
Year 1
19
Continue meetings with the Close the GAP ADA Focus Group and form an official Advisory Committee to provide guidance on the ADA Transition Plan implementation, input on priorities such as APS locations and can weigh in on technically infeasible ramp designs, and transportation project reviews across the city.
Year 1
20
Update Inventory of On-Street ADA Parking spaces to match PROWAG which calls for 1 accessible space for every 25 marked or metered spaces on a block perimeter (for first 100 spaces) and if more than 100 spaces are provided, an additional 1 accessible space for every 50 additional marked or metered spaces (in excess of the first 100) on a block perimeter.
Year 1-5
21
Collaborate with NCDOT on advanced planning for future resurfacing projects to seek additional funding to achieve full PAR upgrades and compliance on high priority corridors.
Ongoing
22
Advocate with NCDOT leadership to include signal equipment modification during ramp upgrades to provide push buttons and ensure compliant ramps and push button placement.
Ongoing
23
Advocate with NCDOT leadership to modify policies for installation of audible pedestrian signals (APS) in order to comply with PROWAG.
Ongoing
24
Advocate with NCDOT to expand requirements for provision of an accessible PAR through construction zones on NCDOT roads.
Ongoing
/ GAP Plan /// 29
6.0 ADA COORDINATOR In accordance with 28 CFR 35.107(a), the City of Asheville has identified an ADA Title II Coordinator to oversee the City of Asheville policies and procedures. Contact information for this individual is as follows: Bradley J. Stein, MPA, CPCU, ARM, AIC City of Asheville Risk Manager / ADA Coordinator P.O. Box 7148 Asheville, NC 28802 Office Phone: 828-259-5687 Mobile Phone: 828-552-1179 Email: bstein@ashevillenc.gov
7.0 REQUEST AND GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, each agency is required to publish its responsibilities in regard to the ADA. This public notice is provided in Appendix C. If users of The City of Asheville programs, facilities and services believe the City of Asheville has not provided reasonable accommodation, they have the right to file a grievance. In accordance with 28 CFR 35.107(b), the City of Asheville has developed a grievance procedure for the purpose of the prompt and equitable resolution of citizens’ complaints, concerns, comments, and other grievances. This grievance procedure is outlined in Appendix C. The City of Asheville has also incorporated a software application by the name of The Asheville App (add link) into their Customer Service and request operations. The purpose of the app is to provide citizens a convenient way to notify the City of concerns, requests and informal complaints so they may be addressed without the need to file a formal grievance. When a concern is received, it is routed to the appropriate City department for a response.
/ GAP Plan /// 30
8.0 MOVING FORWARD 8.1 Next Steps The City will begin internal coordination to address the programmatic barriers identified in the Transition Plan. The City will develop an implementation plan for the next 40 fiscal years. Projects identified in the ADA Transition Plan will be programmed within the 40-year budget based on the prioritization provided (See Table 1 and 2) and other factors determined by the City, such as how barrier removal can be incorporated into future City projects identified for capital improvements. The City also intends to adopt the 2011 Proposed Accessibility Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities in the Public Rights-of-Way (PROWAG) to enable City enforcement of these guidelines throughout the design and construction process of pedestrian facilities s in the public rights-of-way.
8.2 Plan Monitoring and Updates Given the number of barriers across the City, the associated cost for improvements, and available funding mechanisms, full compliance is anticipated to be achieved over a period of 40 years. For each year of implementation, the City will develop a plan outlining specific actions to be completed during the year based on this implementation plan. Moving forward, the City will also monitor progress as described in the tasks and schedule below: 1.
Tracking system: The City of Asheville will document the removal of barriers from its transportation system and maintain a database of such information. As progress is made removing barriers in priority areas and around the community the City will be able to document improvements and identify areas in need of improvement. As the Transition Plan is implemented, compliant corridors and individual compliant elements will be removed from the expected Transition Plan improvements. At the end of each year, the City will complete a program review and an annual update report summarizing completed actions and describing any changed in conditions. The report enables tracking of progress in removing accessibility barriers and achieving ADA compliance. 2. Annual reporting: The annual report will be produced and presented to the City Council and made available to the public each March. 3. Plan updates: This document will continue to be updated as conditions within the City of Asheville evolve. • The implementation section of this document will be updated every 5 years. • The remaining body of the document will be updated on an as needed basis. • The City recognizes the importance of public input as the priority corridor schedule evolves. With each update, a public comment period will be established to continue the public outreach.
/ GAP Plan /// 31
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: SELF-EVALUATION FINDINGS AND CORRIDOR DETAILS
APPENDIX 10: ADA PROJECT LISTS Table Column Descriptions 1.
Map ID
2. Road Name 3. Segment 4. Current Funding Status Not Funded Funded: Noted as funded as a City of Asheville bond project, a City or NCDOT Resurfacing project, or a funded NCDOT project (which may also include City matching funds) Partial Funding: Overlapping funded project (noted) does not cover all of the corridor needs. Planned (MTP): This project has been identified in the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) Study Complete: A corridor study* has been completed with recommendations to move forward into further study and/or project development. 5. Next Step for Project Implementation Fund Planning*: Additional planning is required to better define the scope of corridor recommendations to address overlapping land use and transportation needs. Fund Feasibility Study: Due to observed corridor constraints, additional feasibility analysis is needed to refine the project limits and details. Fund Preliminary Engineering: These projects will require preliminary engineering (30% design) to further evaluate right-of-way needs, constraints and cost. Submit for Prioritization: The next step for unfunded but planned MTP projects is prioritization through the FBRMPO and NCDOT’s SPOT process. Design, Right-of-Way, Construction: Next step for funded projects. 6. Project Description: Initial description based on preliminary project needs assessment or, if funded, the associated project scope and description. 7. Project Pedestrian/ADA Needs: Initial assessment to identify needs related to sidewalk gaps, existing sidewalk conditions (including ADA non-compliance) and pedestrian crossings. 8. ADA Condition Scan: Results of a desktop scan of existing sidewalks along the corridor to assess ADA compliance of existing sidewalks. 1 – ADA Compliant*: 2 – Good Condition: 3 – Fair Condition: 4 – Moderate Condition: 5 – Poor Condition:
Remove from ADA Transition Plan Needs Compliance Review Needs ADA Upgrades in Spots (Specific Locations) Needs Many ADA Upgrades Needs Significant ADA Upgrades (Full Sidewalk Reconstruction for Much of the Corridor) *Note: Based on the Corridor Approach, no corridors were deemed fully compliant as full detailed ADA assessments have not been conducted as part of this process. For more on the Corridor Approach and when this assessment will be completed, see Chapter 6 of the report.
1
Woodfin Beaver Lake
Mile
NORTH
6.D 9.I
26
4.F 5.H
9.B 2.E 4.H
8.D
3.G
4.I
240
6.F
2.D 6.E 3.E 2.C 4.G 7.B 4.A 8.C 4.C 5.A 7.A 6.B 9.L
5.I
8.E 8.A
9.A
9.J 3.F
40
9.K
40
2.A 4.B 8.G
3.B 3.A240 5.B 40
9.C 9.M
2.B
4.J
4.D Biltmore Estate
1.A
3.C
9.D 9.E 9.F 5.C 4.E
6.A 8.B
6.C
Biltmore Forest
2.A 9.M 8.G 4.B 9.E 9.F 9.D
26
3.D
DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE
6.E
NCDOT: ADA PROJECTS
240
3.E
2.C 8.C
5.C
8.F
2.D
4.G
Biltmore Forest
9.G
7.B
5.E
5.A
Groups 1 and 2
5.D 9.H
Groups 3 and 4
Lake Julian
Groups 5 and 6 Groups 7 and 8 Group 9
4.A
4.C
Downtown Asheville
5.F
City of Asheville Area Cities
5.G
7.A
6.B
9.L 4.B
AVL Regional Airport
2.A
0.5
Mills River
Miles
Fletcher
Map ID #
Segment
Total Score
Tunnel Rd
New Haw Creek Rd to Porters Cove Rd
19
2.A
Biltmore Ave
Southside Ave to Thompson St
18
2.B
Fairview Rd (Alt US 74)
Swannanoa River Rd to School Rd
18
2.C
Merrimon Ave (US 25)
I-240 Interchange
18
2.D
Merrimon Ave (US 25)
I-240 to WT Weaver Blvd
2.E
Patton Ave (US 19/23; Alt US 74)
Johnston Blvd/ Haywood Rd to I-240 Interchange
Tunnel Rd
Chunns Cove to S. Tunnel Rd
Tunnel Rd
Tunnel Rd to Chunns Cove Rd
1.A
3.A
3.B
Road Name
Funding Status
Next Step
Project Description
Pedestrian/ADA Needs
ADA Condition Rating (1-5)
ADA Condition Scan Description
Planned (MTP)
Submit for Prioritization
Access Management Project to include Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Study Complete
Fund Preliminary Eng
Study recommends Biltmore and McDowell Greenway Connector Option A: Remove a travel lane on Biltmore Ave for a sidepath or separated bicycle facility between Southside and Caledonia Road.
Widen Sidewalks (or Sidepath) &/or Buffer from Traffic; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
Fund Planning
Sidewalk on West Side between Swannanoa River Rd and First Signal at Shopping Center. Investigate Pedestrian and Bicycle Crossing Needs at Old Charlotte Highway
Connection to Future Greenway; Residential Housing; Retail and Transit
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
Planned (MTP)
Submit for Prioritization
Road Diet with Complete Streets Elements
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
18
Planned (MTP)
Submit for Prioritization
Road Diet with Complete Streets Elements
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
18
Bond Funded (Partial for Sidewalk Gaps)
Right of Way for Bond
Bond Match; 80% LAPP Funded
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
Study Complete
Fund Preliminary Eng
Study recommends a sidepath (south side) from the Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) Tunnel to I-240; includes roadway and intersection and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & improvements. Widen sidewalk through the interchange to More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades create a multiuse sidepath.
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
Grouped Study Complete
Fund Preliminary Eng
Study recommends a sidepath (south side) from the Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) Tunnel to I-240; includes roadway and intersection and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & improvements. Widen sidewalk through the interchange to More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades create a multiuse sidepath.
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
Study recommends a sidepath (south side) from the Tunnel to I-240; includes roadway and intersection ADA Upgrades; Improved Crossings and Conversion improvements. Widen sidewalk through the interchange to to Greenway create a multiuse sidepath.
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
17
3.C
Tunnel Rd
I-240 Interchange
17
Study Complete
ADA Compliance Review - See Overlapping Greenway Project
3.D
Hendersonville Rd (US 25)
Rock Hill Rd to NC 280
17
Study Complete
Fund Preliminary Eng
See Hendersonville Road Study
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
3.E
Charlotte St
I-240 Interchange
17
Planned (MTP) Fund Short Term ADA Upgrades
Submit for Prioritization
MTP Proposed Modern Roundabout Interchange. Recommend Short Term ADA Signal Upgrades Due to Recent Crashes
Pedestrian Signals and Corridor ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
3.F
Smokey Park Hwy Sand Hill Rd to Old (US 19/23; Alt US Haywood Rd 74)
17
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
3.G
Patton Ave (US 19/23; Alt US 74)
4.A
Biltmore Ave (US Patton Ave to Hilliard 25) Ave
4.B
McDowell St (US 25)
Old Haywood Rd to Johnston Blvd/ Haywood Rd
Entire Street
Fund Planning Submit for Prioritization
Access Management Project to Include Bike/Ped in the MTP (Not Funded)
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
16
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades Possible Road Diet for Reduced Pedestrian Exposure
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
16
Fund Preliminary Eng
Study Recommended the Following Under Biltmore and Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) McDowell Greenway Connector Option B: Remove a travel and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & lane on McDowell Street to provide a sidepath on one More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades side of the street.
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
17
Planned (MTP)
Study Complete
Map ID #
Road Name
Segment
Total Score
Funding Status
Next Step
Project Description
Pedestrian/ADA Needs
ADA Condition Rating (1-5)
ADA Condition Scan Description
Fund Planning
Planning Needed to Evaluate Pedestrian Accomodations Plan
Improved & More Frequent Crossings (Consider Potential for Road Diet to Address Overlapping Bicycle Needs)
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
Submit for Prioritization
Access Management Project To Include Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Fund Planning
Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalk; Ramp Crossing Treatments Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalk; Ramp Crossing and ADA Upgrades; Consider Widening for Sidepath for Treatments and ADA Upgrades; Consider Widening Overlapping Bicycle Needs for Sidepath for Overlapping Bicycle Needs
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Planned (MTP)
Submit for Prioritization
Road Diet with Complete Streets Elements
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
16
Planned (MTP)
Submit for Prioritization
Pedestrian Signals and Corridor ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
Sand Hill Rd to Patton Ave
16
Funded (NCDOT# HL-0003) Construction 2022
Resurfacing+ Project (ADA Upgrades)
Pedestrian Signals and Corridor ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
Haywood Rd
I-240 to Sand Hill Rd
16
Funded (NCDOT# HL-0003) Construction 2022
Resurfacing+ Project (ADA Upgrades)
Pedestrian Signals and Corridor ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
4.J
Sweeten Creek Rd (Alt US 25)
Crayton Rd to Rock Hill Rd
16
Planned (MTP)
Access Management Project To Include Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
5.A
Broadway St
Patton Ave to I-240
15
Widen Sidewalk Where Feasible
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
4.C
S. Charlotte St
I-240 to Biltmore Ave
16
4.D
Hendersonville Rd (US 25)
I-40 to Rock Hill Rd
16
4.E
Hendersonville Rd (US 25)
I-40 Interchange
16
4.F
Merrimon Ave (US 25)
WT Weaver Blvd to Beaverdam Rd
16
4.G
Broadway St
I-240 Interchange
4.H
Haywood Rd
4.I
Entire St
15
Planned (MTP)
Study Complete
Submit for Prioritization
Fund Preliminary Eng
Study recommends parallel greenway along the west side Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) of I-240 connecting to Tunnel Road near southern mall and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & access. Connects to Swannanoa River Road as a sidepath More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades along the east side.
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalk; Ramp Crossing Treatments and ADA Upgrades; Consider Widening East Side for Sidepath for Overlapping Bicycle Needs
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
5.B
S Tunnel Rd
5.C
Hendersonville Rd (US 25)
Biltmore Ave to I-40
15
Fund Planning
Planning Needed to Integrate Planned Projects for Adjoining Road Sections to the North and South
5.D
Long Shoals Rd (NC 146)
Hendersonville Rd to Overlook Dr
15
Fund Planning
Planning Needed to Evaluate Pedestrian Accomodations Plan
Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalk (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.E
Long Shoals Rd (NC 146)
Schenck Parkway to Overlook Dr
15
Fund Planning
Planning Needed to Evaluate Pedestrian Accomodations Plan
Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalk (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
North Side Construction; Submit for Prioritization for Remaining
Planned Access Management Project in MTP to Include Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & Possible Multiuse Sidepath) More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.F
Airport Rd (NC 280)
Watson Rd to Hendersonville Rd
15
Bond Funded for North Side; Planned (MTP) for Remaining
5.G
Airport Rd (NC 280)
Town of Fletcher Boundary
15
Planned (MTP)
Fund Preliminary Eng
Access Management Project To Include Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Partially Funded (NCDOT# BL-0005)
Fund Preliminary Eng for Remainder (Construction 2022 for Section under I-26)
Partially Funded - NCDOT pedestrian improvements from US 19/23 northbound exit ramp to north of SR 1477 (Riverside Drive). Needs sidewalk and crossings for remainder of limits.
Complete Sidewalk One Side (Consider Sidepath for Overlapping Planned Greenway Connection); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.H
Broadway St
WT Weaver Blvd to I-26 Interchange
15
Map ID #
5.I
Road Name
Haywood Rd
Segment
Beverly Rd West to I-240
Total Score
15
Funding Status
Next Step
Funded (NCDOT# HL-0003) Construction 2022
Project Description
Pedestrian/ADA Needs
ADA Condition Rating (1-5)
ADA Condition Scan Description
Resurfacing+ Project (ADA Upgrades)
Pedestrian Signals and Corridor ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
14
Fund Planning
Planning Needed to Evaluate Pedestrian Accomodations Plan
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (Consider Sidepath for Overlapping Planned Greenway Connection) & Widen &/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
Biltmore Ave (US Southside Ave to 25) Hilliard Ave
14
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
6.C
New Haw Creek Rd
Arco Rd to Beverly Rd
14
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
6.D
Merrimon Ave (US 25)
Beaverdam Rd to Wembley Rd
14
Planned (MTP)
Submit for Prioritization
Road Diet with Complete Streets Elements
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
6.E
Broadway St
I-240 to WT Weaver Blvd
14
Planned (MTP)
Submit for Prioritization
Planed modernization project to include a road diet and pedestrian upgrades from Chestnut Street to I-240.
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
6.F
Haywood Rd
Beverly Rd West to Roberts St/Clingman Ave Traffic Cir
14
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
7.A
Clingman Ave
Entire St
13
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
7.B
College St & Tunnel Rd
Charlotte St to Beaucatcher Tunnel
13
Fund Planning
ADA Upgrades; Improved & More Frequent Crossings (Consider Potential for Road Diet to Address Overlapping Bicycle Needs)
Complete Sidewalk Gaps Both Sides; Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades; Consider Connections to Planned Tunnel Road Sidepath (to the East)
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
8.A
Brevard Rd (NC 191)
I-240 to Haywood Rd
12
Fund Planning
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Two Sides with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Two Sides with Transit Stops Enhancements; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
8.B
Sardis Rd (NC 112)
Country Meadows Dr to Sand Hill Rd
12
ROW 2025/ Construction 2028
Roadway Modernization Project from US 19/23 to Brevard Complete Sidewalk Both Sides with Improved & Road (NC 191). Project to Include Complete Sidewalk Both More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades. Consider Sides and Bike Lanes. Multiuse Sidepath to Connect Planned Greenways.
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
8.C
Montford Ave
I-240 Interchange
12
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
8.D
Louisiana Ave
Haywood Rd to Patton Ave
12
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
8.E
Sand Hill Rd
Wendover Rd to Haywood Rd
12
Fund Planning
Confirm Needs with Neighborhoods and Evaluate Future Land Uses along N. Bear Creek Road
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
8.F
Mills Gap Rd
Hendersonville Rd to Alpine Ridge Dr
12
ROW 2022/ Construction 2024
Roadway Modernization Project from US 25 to Weston Road. Project to Include Complete Sidewalk Both Sides and Bike Lanes.
Complete Sidewalk Both Sides with Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades.
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
8.G
Swannanoa River One Way to Bryson St Rd
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
9.A
Amboy Rd Bridge
French Broad River Bridge
11
Funded (NCDOT# U-4739)
ROW 2025/ Construction 2030
Roadway Modernization with Complete Streets (and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)
Needs Sidewalk Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
9.B
N. Louisiana Ave
Patton Ave to north of Hazel Mill Rd
11
Funded (NCDOT# U-6162)
ROW 2025
Roadway modernization project to include completion of sidewalks both sides and bicycle lanes.
Complete Sidewalk Gaps Both Sides with Transit Stops Connections; ADA and Crossing Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
9.C
Wood Ave
Swannanoa River Rd to Future St
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
6.A
Brevard Rd (NC 191)
6.B
I-240 to Stradley Mtn Rd/Ridgefield Blvd
Funded (NCDOT# U-6047)
Funded (NCDOT# U-5834)
12
Map ID #
Road Name
Segment
Total Score
Funding Status
Next Step
Project Description
Pedestrian/ADA Needs
ADA Condition Rating (1-5)
ADA Condition Scan Description
Study Complete
Fund Preliminary Eng
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades (Consider Overlapping Biltmore/McDowell Corridor Study Recommendations) Including a Sidepath between Biltmore Ave and McDowell St.
Complete Sidewalk Gaps Both Sides with Transit Stops Connections; ADA and Crossing Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Study Complete
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades (Consider Overlapping Biltmore/McDowell Corridor Study Recommendations) Including a Sidepath between Biltmore Ave and McDowell St.
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Study Complete
Fund Preliminary Eng
Study Recommends Widening the Sidewalk on the West Side for a Sidepath to Connect to Swannanoa River Greenway to the North and Biltmore Village Sidepath to the South.
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
9.D
All Souls McDowell St to Crescent (US 25) Hendersonville Rd
9.E
Brooke & Lodge St
Entire Street
9.F
Biltmore Ave
Thompson St to Hendersonville Rd US 25
11
9.G
Overlook Dr
NC 146 to Springside Rd
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
9.H
Rosscraggon Rd and Rathfarnham Entire St Rd
11
Fund Preliminary Eng
Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.
Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.
9.I
Beaverdam Rd
Merrimon Ave to Kimberly Ave
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
9.J
Amboy Rd
Entire St
11
ROW 2025/ Construction 2029
Roadway Modernization with Complete Streets (and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)
Needs Sidewalk Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
9.K
Sand Hill Rd (NC 112)
Lake Dr to Sardis Rd
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
9.L
Southside Ave (US 25)
Entire St
11
Fund Preliminary Eng & ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalks B. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gaps (Both Sides) ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
9.M
Biltmore Ave to Bryson St (US 81) Swannanoa River Rd
ROW 2029
Roadway widening and modernization project. Includes complete streets elements (sidewalks/bike lanes and/ or greenway). Project to be coordinated with Swannanoa River Greenway.
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
11
11
11
Funded (NCDOT# U-4739)
Funded (NCDOT# U-6046/5832)
1
Woodfin
Mile
Beaver Lake
NORTH
4.G
26
5.Q 5.R
4.H
4.I 3.D
5.O 3.A 240
5.N
5.J 5.K
5.P
240
4.J 40
5.L
4.E 5.M
40
4.F
5.T
4.K
5.S
40
5.A Biltmore Estate
Biltmore Forest
26
DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE COA: ADA PROJECTS Group 1
4.H 4.C 2.B 5.R
5.B
5.C
5.F
5.H 5.G 4.B
5.E
1.A
Group 2 Lake Julian
4.L
Group 3 Group 4
4.D
3.D
Group 5
2.A
Downtown Asheville
3.C
5.I
City of Asheville
4.A
3.A
Area Cities
5.D
3.B
AVL Regional Airport
5.N
0.5 5.K
Mills River
Miles
Fletcher
Map ID #
Road Name
Segment
Clingman Ave/ Haywood St to Biltmore Ave
ADA Condition Rating (1-5)
ADA Condition Scan Description
Review Remaining Corridor for ADA Compliance and Crossing Needs
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
A. Improve Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodations from Southside Ave to Patton Ave B. Crossings and ADA Upgrades for Remaining Corridor
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
Total Score
Funding Status
18
Planned Repaving Project (Includes ADA) Planned Protected Bike Lane Project (College St to Biltmore Ave)
Fund Planning to Address Remaining Pedestrian Needs
ADA Upgrades; Improved & More Frequent Crossings (Consider Potential for Road Diet to Address Overlapping Bicycle Needs)
Partially Funded (NCDOT# EB-5830)
Southside Ave to Patton Ave (Preliminary Engineering Funded) Remaining Sections Need Accessibility Funding
Next Step
Pedestrian Project Descriptions
Pedestrian/ADA Needs
1.A
Patton Ave
2.A
Lexington Ave
Entire St
15
2.B
Haywood St
Entire St
15
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings for Sections Not Included in Recent Improvements
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
3.A
Hilliard Ave
Entire St
14
Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalks B. Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides; Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
3.B
Asheland Ave
Hilliard Ave to Phifer St/ Southside Ave
14
Fund Planning
Low Traffic Volumes and Wide Roadway ROW combined with Underutilized Land Use Make this Corridor a Candidate for a Land Use and Transportation Study
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings (Reduce Pedestrian Crossing Widths)
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
3.C
Asheland Ave
Patton Ave to Hilliard Ave
14
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
3.D
Valley St
College St to Hazzard St
14
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
4.A
Church St
Entire St
12
Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalks (Prioritize East Side Completion) B. Improved Crossings and ADA Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gaps One Side; Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
4.B
Battery Park Ave
Entire St
12
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
4.C
Woodfin & Oak Sts
Entire St
13
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
4.D
College St
Patton Ave to Spruce St
12
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
4.E
Livingston St
Entire St
12
Fund Planning
Confirm Needs with Livingston Neighborhood
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades; Consider Traffic Calming and Shorter Crossings
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
4.F
Hospital Dr
Entire St
12
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
4.G
Lakeshore Dr
Shorewood Dr to Merrimon Ave
12
ADA Compliance Review
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
4.H
Montford Ave
Entire Street
12
Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
4.I
Chestnut St
Merrimon Ave to Broadway St
12
4.J
Kenilworth Rd
Tunnel Rd to Pickwick Rd
12
Fund Preliminary Eng
A. Spot Sidewalks B. Sidewalk Extension from Aurora Dr to Beaucatcher Rd (Approx 1800 ft); Plus 2nd Side Spot Sidewalk for Transit; Crossings and ADA Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
4.K
Fairview Rd
Sweeten Creek Rd to School Rd
12
Fund Planning
A. Spot Sidewalks B. 2nd Side Spot Sidewalk for Transit Connections; Crossings and ADA Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
4.L
College St
Charlotte St to Spruce St
12
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
Map ID #
Road Name
Segment
Total Score
Funding Status
Next Step
Pedestrian Project Descriptions
Pedestrian/ADA Needs
ADA Condition Rating (1-5)
ADA Condition Scan Description
5.A
Shiloh Rd
Entire St
11
Fund Planning
Confirm Needs with Shiloh Neighborhood
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.B
Battle Square
Entire St
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.C
Walnut St
Entire St
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
5.D
Coxe Ave
Entire St
11
Southside Ave to Patton Ave Preliminary Engineering Funded) Remaining Sections Need Accessibility Funding
A. Improve Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodations from Southside Avenue to Patton Avenue B. Crossings and ADA Upgrades for Remaining Corridor
Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.E
Wall St
Entire St
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.F
O'Henry Ave
Entire St
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.G
Otis St
Entire St
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.H
N French Broad Ave
Entire St
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.I
S French Broad Ave
Patton Ave to Hilliard Ave
11
ADA Compliance Review Evaluate Future Bike/Ped Connection Needs Due to I-26
A. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades B. Possible Additional Needs to Connect to New Greenway (I-26 Project)
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.J
Roberts St
Lyman St/ Clingman Ave Ext north to Traffic Cir
11
Fund Preliminary Eng
Sidewalk One Side
Sidewalk and Crossings
5.K
Depot St
Livingston St to Lyman St/ Clingman Ave Ext
11
Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.L
Victoria Rd
Hospital Dr to Fernihurst Dr
11
Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.M
Victoria Rd
Fernihurst Dr to Meadow Rd
11
Fund Preliminary Eng & ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalks B. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.N
S French Broad Ave
Hilliard Ave to Livingston St
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.O
Riverside Dr
I-240 to I-26 Ramp
12
ADA Compliance Review
Recently Constructed
2
Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review
5.P
State St
Entire Street
11
ADA Compliance Review
Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades
ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.Q
Murdock Ave
Entire Street
11
Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.R
Hill St
Montford Ave to Atkinson St
11
Fund Planning
2nd Side Spot Sidewalk for Transit Connections; Crossings and ADA Upgrades
Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades
4
Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades
5.S
Wood Ave Wood Ave and and Cedar St Cedar St
11
Fund Preliminary Eng & ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalks B. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap One Side with Transit Stops Connections; ADA and Crossing Upgrades
3
Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades
5.T
Short McDowell St
11
Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Review
A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades
Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings
5
Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades
Meadow Rd to McDowell St
Partially Funded (NCDOT# EB-5831)
Partially Funded (Neighborhood Greenway)
APPENDIX B: PROJECT COST ESTIMATES Unit Prices Construction costs for upgrading facilities can vary depending on each individual improvement and conditions of each site. Costs can also vary on the type and size of project the improvements are associated with. Listed below are representative 2022 costs for some typical accessibility improvements. These costs were used to generate planning level cost estimates for ADA improvement projects. • • • • • •
Intersection corner ADA improvement retrofit: +/- $5,000 per ramp ($10,000 per corner) Traffic signal upgrade to reposition push buttons for upgraded curb ramps (2 ramps per corner): +/- $50,000 per intersection Traffic control signal APS upgrade retrofit: +/-$16,000 per intersection Sidewalk / Trail ADA improvement retrofit: +/- $20 per SF (bituminous) $25 per SF (concrete) Sidewalk / Trail ADA simple maintenance / repair (e.g. cracks): +/- $8 per SF (bituminous), $17 per SF (concrete) Bus Stop ADA improvement retrofit: +/- $800 per boarding and alighting area (does not include shelter)
The above unit costs do not include design, survey, traffic and pedestrian studies, work zone traffic control (beyond typical applications), drainage improvements, curb and gutter (beyond curb ramps) retaining walls, right-of-way, utility relocation, construction inspection fees, etc. These items will have significant impact on corridor upgrade cost estimates and therefore, preliminary engineering and estimates should be conducted prior to setting project budgets and limits of work, see Chapter 8 of the Close the GAP companion plan for more information on project scoping. Entire Jurisdiction Based on the results of the self-evaluation, the estimated* costs associated with providing ADA accessibility within the entire jurisdiction is $101,274,000*, as detailed in Table 1. This amount signifies a significant investment that The City of Asheville is committed to making in the upcoming years.
Table 1: Estimate of Probable Costs Accessibility Element - City Public Rights-of-Way
Estimated Cost* (Rounded Up to Nearest $1,000)
Sidewalk Repair Assume 50% (94 miles) of Sidewalks need Replacement
$68,244,000
Curb Ramp Upgrades Assume Upgrade for 90% of Curb Ramps
$27,846,000
Signalized Intersections – Push Button and Ped Signals to Accompany Curb Ramp Upgrades Assume 100% of City Maintained Traffic Signals (20 signals)
$1,680,000
Greenway Upgrades and ADA Retrofits Assume 25% (2.3 miles) of Greenway will Require Barrier Removal for ADA Compliance (Intersection ramps included in ADA ramp database)
$2,672,000
Transit Stops Assume 619 Existing Stops Require 8’x5’ Accessible Boarding and Alighting Areas
$832,000
Total
$101,274,000
*Cost Estimate Notes: • 30% Added to Construction Costs for Engineering and Survey (Except for Sidewalk and Greenway Replacement / Maintenance Work) • 40% Continency Added to Engineering/Survey and Construction Given High Level Planning Costs (10% for Simple Sidewalk and Greenway Replacement / Maintenance Work) • Table 1 does not include costs associated with Pedestrian or Traffic Studies, Right-of-Way Acquisition or Easements, Curb and Gutter (Beyond Ramps), Retaining Walls, Tree Impact Evaluations, Utility Adjustments, Drainage Design/Improvements, Work Zone Traffic Control (Beyond Typical Applications) or Construction Inspection. These items will have significant impact on corridor upgrade cost estimates; therefore, preliminary engineering and estimates should be conducted prior to setting project budgets and limits of work, see Chapter 8 of the Close the GAP companion plan for more information on project scoping.
APPENDIX C: GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE AND ADA NOTICE City of Asheville Grievance Procedure Under the Americans with Disabilities Act This Grievance Procedure is established to meet the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ("ADA"). It may be used by anyone who wishes to file a complaint alleging discrimination on the basis of disability in the provision of services, activities, programs, or benefits by the City of Asheville. The City's Personnel Policy governs employment-related complaints of disability discrimination. The complaint should be in writing and contain information about the alleged discrimination such as name, address, phone number of complainant and location, date, and description of the problem. Alternative means of filing complaints, such as personal interviews or a tape recording of the complaint, will be made available for persons with disabilities upon request. The complaint should be submitted by the grievant and/or his/her designee as soon as possible but no later than 180 calendar days after the alleged violation to:
Contact Information Bradley J. Stein City of Asheville Risk Manager / ADA Coordinator P.O. Box 7148 Asheville, NC 28802 Phone: 828-259-5687 Email: bstein@ashevillenc.gov Within 15 calendar days after receipt of the complaint, Brad Stein or his designee will meet with the complainant to discuss the complaint and the possible resolutions. Within 15 calendar days of the meeting, Brad Stein or his designee will respond in writing, and where appropriate, in a format accessible to the complainant, such as large print, Braille, or audio tape. The response will explain the position of the City of Asheville and offer options for substantive resolution of the complaint. If the response by Brad Stein or his designee does not satisfactorily resolve the issue, the complainant and/or his/her designee may appeal the decision within 15 calendar days after receipt of the response to the [City Manager/County Commissioner/ other appropriate high-level official] or [his/her] designee. Within 15 calendar days after receipt of the appeal, the [City Manager/County Commissioner/ other appropriate high-level official] or [his/her] designee will meet with the complainant to discuss the complaint and possible resolutions. Within 15 calendar days after the meeting, the [City Manager/County Commissioner/ other appropriate high-level official] or [his/her] designee will respond in writing, and, where appropriate, in a format accessible to the complainant, with a final resolution of the complaint. All written complaints received by Brad Stein or his designee, appeals to the [City Manager/County Commissioner/ other appropriate high-level official] or [his/her] designee, and responses from these two offices will be retained by the City of Asheville for at least three years.
Those wishing to file a formal written grievance with The City of Asheville may do so by one of the following methods:
Internet Visit the City of Asheville website (https://www.ashevillenc.gov/department/finance/americans-withdisabilities-act/) and click the “ADA” link to the ADA Title II Grievance Form. Fill in the form online and send to the pertinent City of Asheville staff person listed in the Contact Information.
Telephone Contact the pertinent City of Asheville staff person listed in the Contact Information to submit an oral grievance. The staff person will utilize the Internet method above to submit the grievance on behalf of the person filing the grievance.
Paper Submittal Contact the pertinent City of Asheville staff person listed in the Contact Information to request a paper copy of the county’s grievance form, complete the form, and submit it. A staff person will utilize the Internet method above to submit the grievance on behalf of the person filing the grievance.
Contact Information Bradley J. Stein City of Asheville Risk Manager / ADA Coordinator P.O. Box 7148 Asheville, NC 28802 Phone: 828-259-5687 Email: bstein@ashevillenc.gov The ADA Grievance Form will ask for the following information: The name, address, telephone number, and email address for the person filing the grievance. The name, address, telephone number, and email address for the person alleging an ADA violation (if different than the person filing the grievance). A description and location of the alleged violation and the nature of a remedy sought, if known by the complainant. If the complainant has filed the same complaint or grievance with the United States Department of Justice (DOJ), another federal or state civil rights agency, a court, or others, the name of the agency or court where the complainant filed it and the filing date.
File Maintenance The City of Asheville shall maintain ADA grievance files for a period of seven years. Complaints of Title II violations may also be filed with the DOJ within 180 days of the date of discrimination. In certain situations, cases may be referred to a mediation program sponsored by the Department of Justice (DOJ). The DOJ may bring a lawsuit where it has investigated a matter and has been unable to resolve violations.
For more information, contact: U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Disability Rights Section - NYAV Washington, D.C. 20530 www.ada.gov (800) 514-0301 (voice – toll free) (800) 514-0383 (TTY) Title II may also be enforced through private lawsuits in Federal court. It is not necessary to file a complaint with the DOJ or any other Federal agency, or to receive a "right-to-sue" letter, before going to court.
City of Asheville Public Posting: Americans with Disabilities Act Employment: City of Asheville does not discriminate on the basis of disability in its hiring or employment practices and complies with all regulations promulgated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission under Title I of the ADA. In accordance with the requirements of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”), the City of Asheville will not discriminate against qualified individuals with disabilities on the basis of disability in its services, programs, or activities. Effective Communication: City of Asheville will generally, upon request, provide appropriate aids and services leading to effective communication for qualified persons with disabilities so they can participate equally in City of Asheville’s programs, services, and activities, including qualified sign language interpreters, documents in Braille, and other ways of making information and communications accessible to people who have speech, hearing, or vision impairments. Modifications to Policies and Procedures: City of Asheville will make all reasonable modifications to policies and programs to ensure that people with disabilities have an equal opportunity to enjoy all of its programs, services, and activities. For example, individuals with service animals are welcomed in City of Asheville offices, even where pets are generally prohibited. Anyone who requires an auxiliary aid or service for effective communication, or a modification of policies or procedures to participate in a program, service, or activity of City of Asheville, should contact the office of: Brad Stein, ADA Coordinator Risk Management Division City of Asheville 70 Court Plaza Asheville, NC 28801 Telephone: 828-259-5687 Fax: 828-259-5686 as soon as possible but no later than 48 hours before the scheduled event. The ADA does not require the City of Asheville to take any action that would fundamentally alter the nature of its programs or services, or impose an undue financial or administrative burden. Complaints that a program, service, or activity of City of Asheville is not accessible to persons with disabilities should be directed to: Brad Stein, ADA Coordinator City of Asheville, Risk Management Division PO Box 7148 Asheville, NC 28802 Telephone 828-259-5687 City of Asheville will not place a surcharge on a particular individual with a disability or any group of individuals with disabilities to cover the cost of providing auxiliary aids/services or reasonable modifications of policy, such as retrieving items from locations that are open to the public but are not accessible to persons who use wheelchairs.
City of Asheville Title II: Grievance Form
APPENDIX D: ADA STANDARDS Design Standards The City of Asheville intends to adopt the proposed Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) as its design standard. A copy of this document can be found at the following link online: https://www.access-board.gov/prowag/.
Overlap with non PROWAG requirements – ADA Design Procedures Intersection Corners Curb ramps or blended transitions will be constructed or upgraded to achieve compliance within all capital improvement projects to the maximum extent feasible. There may be limitations which make it technically infeasible for an intersection corner to achieve full accessibility within the scope of any project. Regardless of whether full compliance can be achieved or not, each intersection corner shall be made as compliant as possible within the scope of the project in accordance with the judgment of City of Asheville staff. Those limitations will be noted and those intersection corners will remain on the transition plan. As future projects or opportunities arise, those intersection corners shall continue to be incorporated into future work.
Sidewalks / Trails Sidewalks and trails will be constructed or upgraded to achieve compliance within all capital improvement projects to the maximum extent feasible. There may be limitations which make it technically infeasible for segments of sidewalks or trails to achieve full accessibility within the scope of any project. Regardless of whether full compliance can be achieved or not, every sidewalk or trail shall be made as compliant as possible within the scope of the project in accordance with the judgment of City of Asheville staff. Those limitations will be noted and those segments will remain on the transition plan. As future projects or opportunities arise, those segments shall continue to be incorporated into future work.
Traffic Control Signals Traffic control signals will be constructed or upgraded to achieve compliance within all capital improvement projects to the maximum extent feasible. There may be limitations which make it technically infeasible for individual traffic control signal locations to achieve full accessibility within the scope of any project. Regardless of whether full compliance can be achieved or not, each traffic signal shall be made as compliant as possible within the scope of the project in accordance with the judgment of City of Asheville staff. Those limitations will be noted and those locations will remain on the transition plan. As future projects or opportunities arise, those locations shall continue to be incorporated into future work.
Bus Stops Bus stops will be constructed or upgraded to achieve compliance within all capital improvement projects to the maximum extent feasible. There may be limitations which make it technically infeasible for individual bus stop locations to achieve full accessibility within the scope of any project. Regardless of whether full compliance can be achieved or not, each transit stop shall be made as compliant as possible within the scope of the project in accordance with the judgment of City of Asheville staff. Those limitations will be noted and those locations will remain on the transition plan. As future projects or opportunities arise, those locations shall continue to be incorporated into future work.
On-Street Parking On-Street Parking will be located and or constructed to achieve compliance. Regardless of whether full compliance can be achieved or not, each parking space shall be made as compliant as possible within the scope of the project in accordance with the judgment of City of Asheville staff.
Street Crossings Street crossings will be constructed or upgraded to achieve compliance within all projects to the maximum extent feasible. There may be limitations which make it technically infeasible for a crossing to achieve full accessibility within the scope of any project. Regardless of whether full compliance can be achieved or not, each street crossing shall be made as compliant as possible within the scope of the project in accordance with the judgment of City of Asheville staff. Those limitations will be noted and those crossings will remain on the transition plan. As future projects or opportunities arise, those crossings shall continue to be incorporated into future work.
Other Transit Facilities Additional transit facilities are present within the limits of The City of Asheville. Those facilities fall under the jurisdiction of Transit Provider. The City of Asheville will work with Transit Provider to ensure that those facilities meet all appropriate accessibility standards.
Other policies, practices and programs Policies, practices and programs not identified in this document will follow the applicable ADA standards.
FHWA Guidance on Closing Pedestrian Crossings An alteration that decreases or has the effect of decreasing the accessibility of a facility below the requirements for new construction at the time of the alternation is prohibited. For example, the removal of an existing curb ramp or sidewalk (without equivalent replacement) is prohibited. However, the FHWA has indicated a crossing may be closed if an engineering study (performed by the City and not included in the scope of this Transition Plan) determines the crossing is not safe for any user. The crossing should be closed by doing the following: • • •
A physical barrier is required to close a crossing at an intersection. FHWA has determined that a strip of grass between the sidewalk and the curb IS acceptable as a physical barrier. A sign should be used to communicate the closure. The agency wishing to close certain intersection crossings should have a reasonable and consistent policy on when to do so written in their Transition Plan or as a standalone document. If safety concerns are established by an engineering study, a pedestrian crossing should not be accommodated for any user. The City should also develop and implement a policy on how to close those crossings that are established based on the existing conditions at the crossing location (e.g., existing sidewalk leading up to the curb in the direction of the crossing or existing curb ramp or crosswalk serving the crossing).
APPENDIX E: GLOSSARY OF TERMS ABA: See Architectural Barriers Act. ADA: See Americans with Disabilities Act. ADA Transition Plan: The City of Asheville’s transportation system plan that identifies accessibility needs, the process to identify methods to ensure that all transportation facilities, services, programs, and activities are accessible to all individuals. ADAAG: See Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines. Accessible: A facility that is accessible to and usable by people with disabilities using the design requirements of the ADA. Accessible Pedestrian Signal (APS): A device that communicates information about the WALK phase in audible and vibrotactile formats. Alteration: A change to a facility in the public rights-of-way that affects or could affect access, circulation, or use. An alteration must not decrease or have the effect of decreasing the accessibility of a facility or an accessible connection to an adjacent building or site. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): The Americans with Disabilities Act; Civil rights legislation passed in 1990 and effective July 1992. The ADA sets design guidelines for accessibility to public facilities, including sidewalks and trails, by individuals with disabilities. Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG): contains scoping and technical requirements for accessibility to buildings and public facilities by individuals with disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. APS: See Accessible Pedestrian Signal. Architectural Barriers Act (ABA): Federal law that requires facilities designed, built, altered or leased with Federal funds to be accessible. The Architectural Barriers Act marks one of the first efforts to ensure access to the built environment. Capital Improvement Plan (CIP): The CIP for the Transportation Department includes an annual capital budget and a five-year plan for funding the new construction and reconstruction projects on the county’s transportation system. Detectable Warning: A surface feature of truncated domes, built in or applied to the walking surface to indicate an upcoming change from pedestrian to vehicular way. DOJ: See United States Department of Justice Federal Highway Administration (FHWA): A branch of the US Department of Transportation that administers the federal-aid Highway Program, providing financial assistance to states to construct and improve highways, urban and rural roads, and bridges. FHWA: See Federal Highway Administration Pedestrian Access Route (PAR): A continuous and unobstructed walkway within a pedestrian circulation path that provides that is accessible to and usable by people with disabilities.
Pedestrian Circulation Route (PCR): A prepared exterior or interior way of passage provided for pedestrian travel. PROWAG: An acronym for the proposed Guidelines for Accessible Public Rights-of-Way issued in 2011 by the U. S. Access Board. This guidance addresses roadway design practices, slope, and terrain related to pedestrian access to walkways and streets, including crosswalks, curb ramps, street furnishings, pedestrian signals, parking, and other components of public rights-of-way. Right-of-Way: A general term denoting land, property, or interest therein, usually in a strip, acquired for the network of streets, sidewalks, and trails creating public transportation access within a public entity’s jurisdictional limits. Section 504: The section of the Rehabilitation Act that prohibits discrimination by any program or activity conducted by the federal government. United States Access Board: An independent federal agency that develops and maintains design criteria for buildings and other improvements, transit vehicles, telecommunications equipment, and electronic and information technology. It also enforces accessibility standards for Federal facilities covered under the Architectural Barriers Act. United States Department of Justice (DOJ): The United States Department of Justice (often referred to as the Justice Department or DOJ), is the United States federal executive department responsible for the enforcement of the law and administration of justice.
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing
Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing